ArticleBMC cancer2015
Putative stem cell markers in cervical squamous cell carcinoma are correlated with poor clinical outcome.
Article in BMC cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inflammation and Stem Cell Stochasticity of HPV-induced Cervical Cancer: Epigenetics based Biomarkers through Microbiome and Metabolome for Personalized Medicine: A Systematic Review.Current medicinal chemistry · 2025Pooled it
- A potential fate decision landscape of the TWEAK/Fn14 axis on stem and progenitor cells: a systematic review.Stem cell research & therapy · 2022Pooled it
- The Prognostic Value of Cancer Stem Cell Markers in Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2021Pooled it
- SOX2 Is a Potential Diagnostic Biomarker and Anticancer Target in Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma in Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa: A Case Series Study.JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health · 2026Article
- The molecular pathogenesis of SOX2 in prostate cancer.Discover oncology · 2025Review
- Targeting Cervical Cancer Stem Cells by Phytochemicals.Current medicinal chemistry · 2024Review
- Hsa_circ_0084912 Drives the Progression of Cervical Cancer Via Regulating miR-429/SOX2 Pathway.Molecular biotechnology · 2023Article
- Exploring the dynamic interplay between cancer stem cells and the tumor microenvironment: implications for novel therapeutic strategies.Journal of translational medicine · 2023Review
- The Musashi RNA-binding proteins in female cancers: insights on molecular mechanisms and therapeutic relevance.Biomarker research · 2023Review
- Unveiling diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for cervical cancer: biomarker discovery through proteomics approaches and exploring the role of cervical cancer stem cells.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- The functions of lncRNAs in the HPV-negative cervical cancer compared with HPV-positive cervical cancer.Apoptosis : an international journal on programmed cell death · 2022Review
- Cancer Stem Cells and Their Possible Implications in Cervical Cancer: A Short Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- The potential role of integrin alpha 6 in human mesenchymal stem cells.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Cancer Stem Cells: An Ever-Hiding Foe.Experientia supplementum (2012) · 2022Article
- Infection by High-Risk Human Papillomaviruses, Epithelial-to-Mesenchymal Transition and Squamous Pre-Malignant or Malignant Lesions of the Uterine Cervix: A Series of Chained Events?International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Cervical Carcinoma: Oncobiology and Biomarkers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Review
- Musashi-1-A Stemness RBP for Cancer Therapy?Biology · 2021Review
- Splicing Genomics Events in Cervical Cancer: Insights for Phenotypic Stratification and Biomarker Potency.Genes · 2021Review
- Musashi1 expression is negatively correlated with numb expression in brain metastases.Medicine · 2020Article
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
backgroundThe aim of this study was to elucidate the value of putative cancer stem cell markers Musashi-1, ALDH1, Sox2, and CD49f in predicting the prognosis in cervical squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC).
methodsReal-time PCR and immunohistochemistry staining was performed to examine Musashi-1, ALDH1, Sox2, and CD49f expression in archived specimens of CSCC patients with postoperative chemotherapy. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards model were used to assess the prognostic impact of CSC markers for overall survival (OS) and recurrent-free survival (RFS).
resultsThe Real-time PCR data showed that the expression of all markers were increased in CSCC tissues compared with in paired normal cervical tissues (P < 0.05). The IHC result showed that high expression of Msi1, ALDH1, Sox2, and CD49f was found in 25.7%, 43.0%, 62.0% and 29.0% CSCC samples, respectively. Moreover, high expression of Msi1 (P = 0.033 and P = 0.003, respectively), ALDH1 (P = 0.015 and P = 0.002, respectively), and Sox2 (P = 0.005 and P = 0.003, respectively), and low expression of CD49f (P = 0.027 and P = 0.025, respectively) were correlated with poor OS and PFS in CSCC patients. Interestingly, tumors with Msi1(high)/CD49f(low) expression had the poorest prognosis according to Msi1/CD49f stratification. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, Sox2 expression (P = 0.047 and P = 0.018, respectively), ALDH1 expression (P = 0.013 and P = 0.003, respectively), and CD49f expression (P = 0.008 and P = 0.003, respectively) were independent prognostic markers for both OS and RFS.
conclusionsOur results suggest that cancer stem cell markers are linked with poor prognosis of CSCC patients.
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.