Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27835605›Full record

SynthesisOncotarget2016

Meta-analysis of DNA methylation biomarkers in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Cheng Zhang, Jinyun Li, Tao Huang, Shiwei Duan, Dongjun Dai, Danjie Jiang, Xinbing Sui, Da Li, Yidan Chen, Fei Ding and 3 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
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 61 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Diagnostic and prognostic performance ofClinical transplantation and research · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Mallory-Denk bodies and hepatocellular senescence: a causal relationship?Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

13 authors.

Cheng ZhangDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Jinyun LiZhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory of Pathophysiology, School of Medicine, Ningbo University, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China.
Tao HuangZhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory of Pathophysiology, School of Medicine, Ningbo University, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China.
Shiwei DuanZhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory of Pathophysiology, School of Medicine, Ningbo University, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China.
Dongjun DaiZhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory of Pathophysiology, School of Medicine, Ningbo University, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China.
Danjie JiangZhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory of Pathophysiology, School of Medicine, Ningbo University, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China.
Xinbing SuiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Da LiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Yidan ChenDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Fei DingDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Changxin HuangDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Gongying ChenDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Kaifeng WangDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

DNA methylation is an epigenetic mechanism in the pathogenesis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Here, we conducted a systematic meta-analysis to evaluate the contribution of DNA methylation to the risk of HCC. A total of 2109 publications were initially retrieved from PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI and Wanfang literature database. After a four-step filtration, we harvested 144 case-control articles in the meta-analysis. Our results revealed that 24 genes (carcinoma tissues vs adjacent tissues), 17 genes (carcinoma tissues vs normal tissues) and six genes (carcinoma serums vs normal serums) were significantly hypermethylated in HCC. Subgroup meta-analysis by geographical populations showed that six genes (carcinoma tissues vs adjacent tissues) and four genes (carcinoma tissues vs normal tissues) were significantly hypermethylated in HCC. Our meta-analysis identified the correlations between a number of aberrant methylated genes (p16, RASSF1A, GSTP1, p14, CDH1, APC, RUNX3, SOCS1, p15, MGMT, SFRP1, WIF1, PRDM2, DAPK1, RARβ, hMLH1, p73, DLC1, p53, SPINT2, OPCML and WT1) and HCC. Aberrant DNA methylation might become useful biomarkers for the prediction and diagnosis of HCC.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationEpigenesis, GeneticBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, HepatocellularCase-Control StudiesChi-Square DistributionGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansLiver NeoplasmsOdds RatioPhenotypePrognosisRisk FactorsBiomarkers, TumorbiomarkerDNA methylationhepatocellular carcinomameta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID27835605
PMCPMC5348390

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.