ArticleTumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine2016
Prognostic impact and potential interaction of EGFR and c-Met in the progression of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review of c-met as a prognostic indicator in esophageal cancer patients: a meta-analysis study.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Prognostic value of c-MET in oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a study based on the mRNA expression in TCGA database and a meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- MET overexpression and intratumor heterogeneity in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2021Article
- Esophageal Microenvironment: From Precursor Microenvironment to Premetastatic Niche.Cancer management and research · 2020Review
- Increased MET gene copy number negatively affects the survival of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients.BMC cancer · 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
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study is to examine EGFR and c-Met variation in precancerous lesion, early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), and advanced ESCC and to explore their prognostic significance. EGFR and c-Met were detected by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Of 158 endoscopy resection (ER) specimens, c-Met high expression and FISH positive were 44.9 and 12.6 %, respectively. EGFR high expression and FISH positive were 2.5 and 19.6 %, respectively. Of 84 surgical specimens, c-Met high expression and FISH positive were 50 and 8.3 %, respectively. EGFR high expression and FISH positive were 7.1 and 28.5 %, respectively. A significant correlation was observed between c-Met and EGFR FISH positive both in ER (P < 0.001) and surgical specimens (P = 0.029). Patients with EGFR high expression had poorer disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) (P = 0.031 and P = 0.013) in c-Met high-expression group but not in c-Met low-expression group (P = 0.301 and P = 0.439). C-Met FISH positive did not represent a statistically significant adverse prognosis until 24 months later (P = 0.027 and 0.048). EGFR and c-Met might be involved in the tumorigenesis and development of ESCC. EGFR high expression has different prognostic significance in patients with differing c-Met expression status. C-Met FISH positive represent delayed prognostic factor.
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.