ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2015
Prognostic value of circulating endothelial cells in non-small cell lung cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Translational lung cancer research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical utility of circulating tumor-derived endothelial cells in lung cancer detection and prognosis prediction.Oncology letters · 2026Article
- Unveiling the immunomodulatory dance: endothelial cells' function and their role in non-small cell lung cancer.Molecular cancer · 2025Review
- Comprehensive analysis to identify a novel PTEN-associated ceRNA regulatory network as a prognostic biomarker for lung adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- A preliminary study of the clinical significance of folate receptor-positive circulating tumor cell in the management of hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancers.Translational cancer research · 2020Article
- CD34+ Hematopoietic Stem Cell Count Is Predictive of Vascular Event Occurrence in Children with Sickle Cell Disease.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2018Article
- Optimized multiparametric flow cytometric analysis of circulating endothelial cells and their subpopulations in peripheral blood of patients with solid tumors: a technical analysis.Cancer management and research · 2018Article
- Article
- Prognostic significance of β-catenin expression in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis.Translational lung cancer research · 2017Article
- Prognostic value of wingless-type proteins in non-small cell lung cancer patients: a meta-analysis.Translational lung cancer research · 2016Article
- Prognostic value of lymph node ratio in patients with pathological N1 non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review with meta-analysis.Translational lung cancer research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCirculating endothelial cells (CECs) have been indicated as a potential biomarker of vascular damage in a variety of cancers. Several studies have revealed CECs may reflect the extent of tumor angiogenesis; however, the role of CECs in the prognosis of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is undetermined to date. A meta-analysis has been prepared to determine whether the base level of CECs and the changes of CECs after therapy (∆CECs: post-therapeutic value minus the pre- therapeutic value) could be considered as a prognostic tool for patients with NSCLC.
methodsSystematic reviews of studies published before April 30 2015 were conducted on the association between the levels of CECs or ∆CECs and the prognosis of NSCLC in several data bases. Hazard ratios (HRs) and the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to collate the data. Similarly, heterogeneity and publication bias were also evaluated.
resultsA total of nine studies, containing eight prospective studies and one retrospective study, involving 515 patients was identified. Patients with higher level of CECs counts at baseline were associated with longer progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.529-0.891). ∆CECs could also be considered a prognostic indicator in NSCLC patients (HR 0.575, 95% CI: 0.401-0.75). The former and the later are without a significant heterogeneity in the data (I(2)=21.2% and 0.0%, P=0.274 and 0.870, respectively). However, there was no correlation between the base level of CECs and the overall survival (OS) (HR 0.914, 95% CI: 0.560-1.267, I(2)=43.6%, P=0.150).
conclusionsHigher levels of CECs counts at baseline and the ensuing decrease after therapy demonstrated a positive correlation with longer PFS in NSCLC patients. But this phenomenon has not been found in OS. From a certain perspective, CECs counts and ∆CECs could be potential prognostic indicators for NSCLC 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.