Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28039483›Full record

ArticleOncotarget2017

MiR-21 as prognostic biomarker in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients undergoing an organ preservation protocol.

Lidia Maria Rebolho Batista Arantes, Ana Carolina Laus, Matias Eliseo Melendez, Ana Carolina de Carvalho, Bruna Pereira Sorroche, Pedro Rafael Martins De Marchi, Adriane Feijó Evangelista, Cristovam Scapulatempo-Neto, Luciano de Souza Viana, André Lopes Carvalho

Open access · diamondAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lidia Maria Rebolho Batista ArantesMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, SP, Brazil.
Ana Carolina LausMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, SP, Brazil.
Matias Eliseo MelendezMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, SP, Brazil.
Ana Carolina de CarvalhoMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, SP, Brazil.
Bruna Pereira SorrocheMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, SP, Brazil.
Pedro Rafael Martins De MarchiDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, SP, Brazil.
Adriane Feijó EvangelistaMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, SP, Brazil.
Cristovam Scapulatempo-NetoDepartment of Pathology, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, SP, Brazil.
Luciano de Souza VianaDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, SP, Brazil.
André Lopes CarvalhoMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, SP, Brazil.
Hospital de Câncer de Barretos · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite progress in the treatment of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) in recent decades, including new surgical techniques, radiotherapy advances and chemotherapy schedules, the prognosis for the affected patients has not improved at the same pace, and still, most HNSCC patients are diagnosed in advanced stages. To increase their survival, the development of better screening methods for early detection is required and appropriate tailored therapeutic interventions are desired. The aim of the present study was to evaluate miRNAs as prognostic biomarkers in patients undergoing organ preservation protocol for locally advanced HNSCC. For this purpose, we assessed the global miRNA expression profile of 15 HNSCC patients ('screening set') to identify miRNAs differentially expressed in responders and non-responders to therapy. Four miRNAs differentially expressed in HNSCC samples from the 'screening set' were validated in a different cohort of patients (47 samples - 'validation set'). The results from the 'validation set' showed that the higher expression of one of these miRNAs, miR-21, was negatively associated with the treatment response to the organ preservation protocol (p=0.029). A multivariate analysis showed that, in a model adjusted for age, tumor site, p16 immunoexpression and tumor resectability, high expression of miR-21 remained an independent predictor of poor response to the organ preservation protocol (OR=5.69; 95%CI 1.27-25.58; p=0.023), together with clinical stage IV (OR=5.05; 95%CI 1.22-20.88; p=0.025). Furthermore, considering the entire cohort, patients with high expression of miR-21 had worse survival. A multivariate Cox regression analysis also showed miR-21 (HR=2.05; 95%CI 1.05-4.02; p=0.036) and clinical stage IV (HR=3.17; 95%CI 1.49-6.77; p=0.003) as independent prognostic factors (model adjusted for age, tumor site, tumor resectability, and sets 'screening' or 'validation').In conclusion, the results of this study suggest that the evaluation of miR-21 expression could be an important tool for treatment planning and a prognosis predictior for HNSCC patients undergoing organ preservation protocols.

Indexed as

ChemoradiotherapyBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, Squamous CellChi-Square DistributionDisease-Free SurvivalDisease ProgressionFemaleGene Expression ProfilingHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansLaryngeal NeoplasmsMaleMicroRNAsMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisOdds RatioBiomarkers, TumorMicroRNAsMIRN21 microRNA, humanchemoradiationHNSCCmicroRNA

Identifiers

PMID28039483
PMCPMC5354780
OpenAlexW2561471982

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.