Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28415658›Full record

SynthesisOncotarget2017

Diagnostic and prognostic value of blood samples for KRAS mutation identification in lung cancer: a meta-analysis.

Hongchang Shen, Keying Che, Lei Cong, Wei Dong, Tiehong Zhang, Qi Liu, Jiajun Du

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03951233 (Genotyping K-RAS and EGFR in Greek Non-small-cell Lung Cancer Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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.

NCT03951233 completednot on this map

Genotyping K-RAS and EGFR in Greek Non-small-cell Lung Cancer Patients: Incidence, Significance and Treatment Implications

TypeobservationalSponsorHellenic Cooperative Oncology GroupRan2000 to 2014Enrolled424ConditionsNon Small Cell Lung Cancer
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. GenotypingCancer genomics & proteomics
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
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.

Hongchang ShenDepartment of Oncology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, P.R. China.
Keying CheInstitute of Oncology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, P.R. China.
Lei CongDepartment of Oncology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, P.R. China.
Wei DongDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, P.R. China.
Tiehong ZhangDepartment of Oncology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, P.R. China.
Qi LiuInstitute of Oncology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, P.R. China.
Jiajun DuInstitute of Oncology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, P.R. China.
Shandong University · CNShandong Provincial Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and tumor cells (CTC) are novel approaches for identifying genomic alterations. Thus, we designed a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic value and prognostic significance of a KRAS proto-oncogene, GTPase (KRAS) mutation for lung cancer patients. All included articles were from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. Twelve articles that described 1,131 patients were reviewed. True positives (TP), false positives (FP), true negatives (TN), and false negatives (FN) were used to calculate pooled sensitivity, specificity, the positive likelihood ratio (PLR), the negative likelihood ratio (NLR), a diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), the area under the curve (AUC) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). PLR is calculated as sensitivity/(1-specificity) and NLR is (1- sensitivity)/specificity. DOR is a measured of diagnostic effectiveness (PLR/NLR). A survival analysis subgroup was also designed to evaluate prognostic significance. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC were 0.79 (95% CI, 0.63-0.89), 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89-0.96), 12.13 (92% CI, 7.11-20.67), 0.22 (95% CI, 0.12-0.41), 54.82 (95% CI, 23.11-130.09), and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.93-0.96), respectively. KRAS mutation and wild-type hazard ratios for overall survival and progression-free survival were 1.37 (95% CI, 1.08-1.66), 1.46 (95% CI, 1.15-1.77) in blood samples, and 1.16 (95% CI, 1.03-1.28), 1.28 (95% CI, 1.09-1.46) in tumor tissue.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNAMutationDNA Mutational AnalysisHumansLung NeoplasmsPrognosisProportional Hazards ModelsProto-Oncogene MasProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)Publication BiasReproducibility of ResultsROC CurveBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNAKRAS protein, humanMAS1 protein, humanProto-Oncogene MasProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)blooddiagnostic testKRASlung cancerpredictive factor

Identifiers

PMID28415658
PMCPMC5482700
OpenAlexW2593520371

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.