SynthesisPloS one2014
Prognostic value of FGFR gene amplification in patients with different types of cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Role of FGFR1 Gene Amplification as a Poor Prognostic Factor in Squamous Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Published Data.BioMed research international · 2015Pooled it
- Ursolic Acid Inhibits Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Progression by Modulating the FGFR1/AKT/ERK Pathway: Evidence from Network Pharmacology and Experimental Validation.Anti-cancer agents in medicinal chemistry · 2026Article
- Cross-Cancer Detectability of ctDNA Biomarkers in Asian Populations: Implications for Pan-Cancer Detection.Cancer management and research · 2026Review
- New advances in the treatment of EGFR exon20ins mutant advanced NSCLC.American journal of cancer research · 2025Review
- Impact of Molecular Profiling on Therapy Management in Breast Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Longitudinal detection of somatic mutations in the saliva of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma-affected patients: a pilot study.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Preclinical characterization of CPL304110 as a potent and selective inhibitor of fibroblast growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3 for gastric, bladder, and squamous cell lung cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Targeting the FGF/FGFR axis and its co-alteration allies.ESMO open · 2022Article
- Review
- Peritoneal Seeding Is More Common in Gastric Cancer Patients with FGFR2 Amplification or High Tumor Mutation Burden.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Identification of a Novel Inhibitor of TfR1 from Designed and Synthesized Muriceidine A Derivatives.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Evaluation of FGFR targeting in breast cancer through interrogation of patient-derived models.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2021Article
- FGFR-TKI resistance in cancer: current status and perspectives.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2021Review
- Receptor Tyrosine Kinases and Their Signaling Pathways as Therapeutic Targets of Curcumin in Cancer.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- Genetic Characterization of Cancer of Unknown Primary Using Liquid Biopsy Approaches.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Article
- Shallow Whole-Genome Sequencing from Plasma Identifies FGFR1 Amplified Breast Cancers and Predicts Overall Survival.Cancers · 2020Article
- FGFR3 signaling and function in triple negative breast cancer.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2020Article
- Article
- FGF/FGFR signaling pathway involved resistance in various cancer types.Journal of Cancer · 2020Review
- Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) gene amplification has been reported in different types of cancer. We performed an up-to-date meta-analysis to further characterize the prognostic value of FGFR gene amplification in patients with cancer.
methodsA search of several databases, including MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure, was conducted to identify studies examining the association between FGFR gene amplification and cancer. A total of 24 studies met the inclusion criteria, and overall incidence rates, hazard risk (HR), overall survival, disease-free survival, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated employing fixed- or random-effects models depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies.
resultsIn the meta-analysis of 24 studies, the prevalence of FGFR gene amplification was FGFR1: 0.11 (95% CI: 0.08-0.13) and FGFR2: 0.04 (95% CI: 0.02-0.06). Overall survival was significantly worse among patients with FGFR gene amplification: FGFR1 [HR 1.57 (95% CI: 1.23-1.99); p = 0.0002] and FGFR2 [HR 2.27 (95% CI: 1.73-3.00); p<0.00001].
conclusionsCurrent evidence supports the conclusion that the outcomes of patients with FGFR gene amplified cancers is worse than for those with non-FGFR gene amplified cancers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.