Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27588469›Full record

SynthesisOncotarget2016

Cancer stem cell markers predict a poor prognosis in renal cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis.

Bo Cheng, Guosheng Yang, Rui Jiang, Yong Cheng, Haifan Yang, Lijun Pei, Xiaofu Qiu

Open access · diamondAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Oncotarget, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Can CD133 Be Regarded as a Prognostic Biomarker in Oncology: Pros and Cons.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Targeting Cancer Stem Cells to Overcome Chemoresistance.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Biomarker discovery for renal cancer stem cells.The journal of pathology. Clinical research · 2018
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bo ChengDepartment of Urology, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou 646000, China.
Guosheng YangSouthern Medical University, Guangzhou 510280, China.
Rui JiangDepartment of Urology, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou 646000, China.
Yong ChengDepartment of Urology, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou 646000, China.
Haifan YangDepartment of Urology, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou 646000, China.
Lijun PeiDepartment of Urology, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou 646000, China.
Xiaofu QiuSouthern Medical University, Guangzhou 510280, China.
Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University · CNSouthern Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRelevant markers of CSCs may serve as prognostic biomarkers of RCC. However, their actual prognostic significance remains inconclusive. Thus, a meta-analysis was performed to reevaluate the association of CSCs-relevant markers (CXCR4, CD133, CD44, CD105) expression with RCC prognosis more precisely.

methodsPubMed and Embase were searched to look for eligible studies. The pooled hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were used to reassess the association of CSCs markers expression and RCC prognosis of overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), disease-free survival (DFS), and progression-free survival (PFS).

resultsThere were 25 relevant articles, encompassing 2673 RCC patients, eligible for meta-analysis. Overall pooled analysis suggested that high CSCs markers expression predicted poor OS (HR, 2.10, 95% CI: 1.73-2.55) and DFS (HR, 3.77, 95% CI: 2.30-6.19). High CXCR4 expression predicted worse OS (HR, 2.57, 95% CI: 1.95-3.40), CSS (HR,1.97, 95% CI: 1.50-2.59), and DFS (HR, 5.82, 95% CI: 3.01-11.25). CD44 over-expression correlated with a poor OS(HR,1.58, 95% CI: 1.14-2.18), CSS (HR, 2.58, 95% CI: 1.27-5.23), and DFS (HR, 4.49, 95% CI: 2.12-9.53) in RCC patients. CD133 was an independent favorable prognostic factor for CSS (HR, 0.4, 95% CI: 0.29-0.54).

conclusionsThe presence of CSCs markers correlates with poor RCC outcome. CSCs may be potentially utilized as prognostic markers to stratify RCC patients, probably representing also a novel potential therapeutic target.

Indexed as

AC133 AntigenBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, Renal CellHumansHyaluronan ReceptorsKidney NeoplasmsNeoplastic Stem CellsPrognosisReceptors, CXCR4Survival RateAC133 AntigenBiomarkers, TumorCD44 protein, humanCXCR4 protein, humanHyaluronan ReceptorsPROM1 protein, humanReceptors, CXCR4biomarkercancer stem cellsmeta-analysisprognosisrenal cancer

Identifiers

PMID27588469
PMCPMC5323198
OpenAlexW2512577044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.