ArticleTranslational oncology2018
Expression Profile of Three Splicing Factors in Pleural Cells Based on the Underlying Etiology and Its Clinical Values in Patients with Pleural Effusion.
Article in Translational oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Splicing factors (SFs) are involved in oncogenesis or immune modulation, the common underlying processes giving rise to pleural effusion (PE). The expression profiles of three SFs (HNRNPA1, SRSF1, and SRSF3) and their clinical values have never been assessed in PE. The three SFs (in pellets of PE) and conventional tumor markers were analyzed using PE samples in patients with PE (N = 336). The sum of higher-molecular weight (Mw) forms of HNRNPA1 (Sum-HMws-HNRNPA1) and SRSF1 (Sum-HMws-SRSF1) and SRSF3 levels were upregulated in malignant PE (MPE) compared to benign PE (BPE); they were highest in cytology-positive MPE, followed by tuberculous PE and parapneumonic PE. Meanwhile, the lowest-Mw HNRNPA1 (LMw-HNRNPA1) and SRSF1 (LMw-SRSF1) levels were not upregulated in MPE. Sum-HMws-HNRNPA1, Sum-HMws-SRSF1, and SRSF3, but neither LMw-HNRNPA1 nor LMw-SRSF1, showed positive correlations with cancer cell percentages in MPE. The detection accuracy for MPE was high in the order of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA, 85%), Sum-HMws-HNRNPA1 (76%), Sum-HMws-SRSF1 (68%), SRSF3, cytokeratin-19 fragments (CYFRA 21-1), LMw-HNRNPA1, and LMw-SRSF1. Sum-HMws-HNRNPA1 detected more than half of the MPE cases that were undetected by cytology and CEA. Sum-HMws-HNRNPA1, but not other SFs or conventional tumor markers, showed an association with longer overall survival among patients with MPE receiving chemotherapy. Our results demonstrated different levels of the three SFs with their Mw-specific profiles depending on the etiology of PE. We suggest that Sum-HMws-HNRNPA1 is a supplementary diagnostic marker for MPE and a favorable prognostic indicator for patients with MPE receiving chemotherapy.
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.