ArticleSpringerPlus2016
Clinicopathological and prognostic significance of heat shock protein 27 (HSP27) expression in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in SpringerPlus, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- The Role of Hsp27 in Chemotherapy Resistance.Biomedicines · 2022Review
- Heat shock proteins as biomarkers of lung cancer.Cancer biology & therapy · 2020Review
- Clinical, prognostic, and therapeutic significance of heat shock protein 27 in bladder cancer.Oncotarget · 2018Article
- The clinicopathological and prognostic value of HSP27 in hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.OncoTargets and therapy · 2018Article
- Increased HSP27 correlates with malignant biological behavior of non-small cell lung cancer and predicts patient's survival.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Clinicopathological significance of HSP27 in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis.OncoTargets and therapy · 2017Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Numbers of clinical and experimental investigations have provided increasing evidences to demonstrate that heat shock protein 27 (HSP27) is a qualified predictor for many cancers. However, no consensus has been reached on its clinicopathological and prognostic significance in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Therefore, we performed this systematic meta-analysis to help addressing this issue. PubMed, EMBASE, the Web of Science and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched for full-text literatures met out eligibility criteria. We determined the odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) as the appropriate summarized statistics for assessments of clinicopathological and prognostic roles of HSP27, respectively. Q-test and I(2)-statistic were used to evaluate the level of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to examine the stability of overall estimates. Potential publication bias was detected by Begg's test and Egger's test. Finally, ten articles were identified to be included into our meta-analysis. The pooled analyses suggested that HSP27 expression was significantly associated with the unfavorable conditions for differentiation degree, lymphatic metastasis, clinical stage, squamous cell carcinoma and tumor size. However, HSP27 expression had no significant relationship to gender, age and smoking status. Meanwhile, pooled HRs indicated that HSP27 expression could be a predictor for a lower 5-year overall survival (OS) rate (HR: 1.832; 95 % CI 1.322-2.538; P < 0.001) but not for 1-year OS of NSCLC (HR: 0.885; 95 % CI 0.140-5.599; P = 0.896). In conclusion, our meta-analysis demonstrates that HSP27 expression may be a strong biomarker to predict both the poor clinicopathological and prognostic characteristics in patients with NSCLC.
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.