ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2015
Serum neuron specific enolase levels correlate with patient prognosis for advanced lung cancer.
Article in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Methylated PTGER4 is better than CA125, CEA, Cyfra211 and NSE as a therapeutic response assessment marker in stage IV lung cancer.Oncology letters · 2020Article
- Effect of gefitinib on serum EGFR and CYFRA21-1 in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Oncology letters · 2019Article
- Biological Variation and Reference Change Value Data for Serum Neuron-Specific Enolase in a Turkish Population.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To analyze the clinical and prognostic value of neuron specific enolase (NSE) levels in serum of advanced lung cancer patients, we analyzed serum NSE level of 110 advanced lung cancer patients (case group), 100 benign lung disease patients (benign disease group), and 100 healthy persons (control group). Case group patients were divided by NSE level into ≥25 ng/mL (52 cases) and <25 ng/mL (58 cases) groups to analyze overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The results showed the serum NSE levels of case group patients were significantly higher than those of control or benign disease group patients (P<0.05). Serum NSE levels of small cell lung cancer patients were significantly higher than those of patients with other tumor pathologies (all P<0.05). Median OS significantly differed between patients with NSE levels ≥25 ng/mL (23.7 months) and <25 ng/mL (31.4 months) (P<0.05). Median PFS also significantly differed between patients with NSE levels ≥25 ng/mL (13.5 months) and <25 ng/mL (17.6 months) (χ (2)=9.992; P<0.05). Tumor pathology (RR=4.136), patient performance status score (RR=2.903), and serum NSE level (RR=2.338) were factors influencing OS (P<0.05). Patient performance status score (RR=2.903), number of chemotherapy lines (RR=1.776), and serum NSE level (RR=2.075) were influencing factors in patients' PFS (P<0.05). In brief, serum NSE level significantly correlates with advanced lung cancer patient prognosis and may be useful as an auxiliary index to predict prognosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26309614PMC4538059W1600216488What 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.