Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31487295›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2019

The association of D-dimer with clinicopathological features of breast cancer and its usefulness in differential diagnosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yan Lu, LongYi Zhang, QiaoHong Zhang, YongJun Zhang, DeBao Chen, JianJie Lou, JinWen Jiang, ChaoXiang Ren

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yan LuClinical Laboratory, Dongyang People's Hospital, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China.
LongYi ZhangClinical Laboratory, Dongyang People's Hospital, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3625-489X
QiaoHong ZhangClinical Laboratory, Dongyang People's Hospital, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China.
YongJun ZhangClinical Laboratory, Dongyang People's Hospital, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China.
DeBao ChenClinical Laboratory, Dongyang People's Hospital, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China.
JianJie LouClinical Laboratory, Dongyang People's Hospital, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China.
JinWen JiangClinical Laboratory, Dongyang People's Hospital, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China.
ChaoXiang RenClinical Laboratory, Dongyang People's Hospital, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China.
Wenzhou Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStudies have shown that D-dimer levels are significantly correlated with the differential diagnosis and clinicopathological features of breast cancer. However, the results are currently limited and controversial. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the relationship between D-dimer levels and breast cancer. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature, and Wanfang databases were searched to find studies that assessed the association of D-dimer with clinicopathological features of breast cancer and its usefulness in aiding with differential diagnosis. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was applied as the correlation measure.

resultsA total of 1244 patients with breast cancer from 15 eligible studies were included in the meta-analysis. D-dimer levels were higher in the breast cancer group than in the benign (SMD = 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.53-1.52) and healthy (SMD = 1.27; 95% CI = 0.85-1.68) control groups. In addition, elevated D-dimer levels were associated with progesterone receptor-negative tumors (SMD = -0.25; 95% CI = -0.44--0.05). Similarly, there was a significant correlation between D-dimer levels and tumor node metastasis staging (n = 11, SMD = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.57-1.06) and lymph node involvement (n = 8, SMD = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.50-1.09). In contrast, other clinicopathological factors, including estrogen receptor expression and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 expression, were not associated with D-dimer levels.

conclusionThe results of this meta-analysis indicate that plasma D-dimer levels can be used as an important reference for the early identification and staging of breast cancer.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleFibrin Fibrinogen Degradation ProductsHumansPrognosisBiomarkers, TumorFibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Productsfibrin fragment D

Identifiers

PMID31487295
PMCPMC6728019
OpenAlexW2971878505

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.