Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25214541›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology2015

A systematic review and meta-analysis of somatic and germline DNA sequence biomarkers of esophageal cancer survival, therapy response and stage.

J M Findlay, M R Middleton, I Tomlinson

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Association BetweenFrontiers in oncology · 2019
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography combined with Chitosan-FeExperimental and therapeutic medicine · 2018
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

J M FindlayMolecular and Population Genetics, Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford; Oxford OesophagoGastric Centre.
M R MiddletonNIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK.
I TomlinsonMolecular and Population Genetics, Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford; NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK. Electronic address: jfindlay@well.ox.ac.uk.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 090532Wellcome Trust 090532/Z/09/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is an urgent need for biomarkers to help predict prognosis and guide management of esophageal cancer. This review identifies, evaluates and meta-analyses the evidence for reported somatic and germline DNA sequence biomarkers of outcome and stage.

methodsA systematic review was carried out of the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases (20 August 2014), in conjunction with the ASCO Level of Evidence scale for biomarker research. Meta-analyses were carried out for all reported markers associated with outcome measures by more than one study.

resultsFour thousand and four articles were identified, 762 retrieved and 182 studies included. There were 65 reported markers of survival or recurrence 12 (18.5%) were excluded due to multiple comparisons. Following meta-analysis, significant associations were seen for six tumor variants (mutant TP53 and PIK3CA, copy number gain of ERBB2/HER2, CCND1 and FGF3, and chromosomal instability/ploidy) and seven germline polymorphisms: ERCC1 rs3212986, ERCC2 rs1799793, TP53 rs1042522, MDM2 rs2279744, TYMS rs34743033, ABCB1 rs1045642 and MTHFR rs1801133. Twelve germline markers of treatment complications were reported; 10 were excluded. Two tumor and 15 germline markers (11 excluded) of chemo (radio)therapy response were reported. Following meta-analysis, associations were demonstrated for mutant TP53, ERCC1 rs11615 and XRCC1 rs25487. There were 41 tumor/germline reported markers of stage; 27 (65.9%) were excluded.

conclusionsNumerous DNA markers of outcome and stage have been reported, yet few are backed by high-quality evidence. Despite this, a small number of variants appear reliable. These merit evaluation in prospective trials, within the context of high-throughput sequencing and gene expression.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorDNA, NeoplasmEsophageal NeoplasmsGerm-Line MutationHumansNeoplasm StagingPolymorphism, Single NucleotidePrognosisBiomarkers, TumorDNA, Neoplasmbiomarkerscancercancer stagingesophagealgenomicprognosis

Identifiers

PMID25214541
PMCPMC4374384

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.