Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31565488›Full record

ArticleCancer biology & medicine2019

A four-gene signature-derived risk score for glioblastoma: prospects for prognostic and response predictive analyses.

Mianfu Cao, Juan Cai, Ye Yuan, Yu Shi, Hong Wu, Qing Liu, Yueliang Yao, Lu Chen, Weiqi Dang, Xiang Zhang and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer biology & medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Artificial Intelligence-Driven Multi-Omics Approaches in Glioblastoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Development of a web-based tool for estimating individualized survival curves in glioblastoma using clinical, mRNA, and tumor microenvironment features with fusion techniques.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

17 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mianfu CaoInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Juan CaiDepartment of Kidney, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Chongqing 400038, China.
Ye YuanInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Yu ShiInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Hong WuInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Qing LiuInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Yueliang YaoInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Lu ChenInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Weiqi DangInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Xiang ZhangInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Jingfang XiaoInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Kaidi YangInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Zhicheng HeInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Xiaohong YaoInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Yonghong CuiInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Xia ZhangInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Xiuwu BianInstitute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Key Laboratory of Tumor Immunopathology, Ministry of Education of China, Chongqing 400038, China.
Army Medical University · CNSouthwest Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveGlioblastoma (GBM) is the most common primary malignant brain tumor regulated by numerous genes, with poor survival outcomes and unsatisfactory response to therapy. Therefore, a robust, multi-gene signature-derived model is required to predict the prognosis and treatment response in GBM.

methodsGene expression data of GBM from TCGA and GEO datasets were used to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) through DESeq2 or LIMMA methods. The DEGs were then overlapped and used for survival analysis by univariate and multivariate COX regression. Based on the gene signature of multiple survival-associated DEGs, a risk score model was established, and its prognostic and predictive role was estimated through Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test. Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was conducted to explore high-risk score-associated pathways. Western blot was used for protein detection.

resultsFour survival-associated DEGs of GBM were identified: OSMR, HOXC10, SCARA3, and SLC39A10. The four-gene signature-derived risk score was higher in GBM than in normal brain tissues. GBM patients with a high-risk score had poor survival outcomes. The high-risk group treated with temozolomide chemotherapy or radiotherapy survived for a shorter duration than the low-risk group. GSEA showed that the high-risk score was enriched with pathways such as vasculature development and cell adhesion. Western blot confirmed that the proteins of these four genes were differentially expressed in GBM cells.

conclusionsThe four-gene signature-derived risk score functions well in predicting the prognosis and treatment response in GBM and will be useful for guiding therapeutic strategies for GBM patients.

Indexed as

Differentially expressed genesgene set enrichment analysisglioblastoma prognosisradiotherapytemozolomide chemotherapy

Identifiers

PMID31565488
PMCPMC6743613
OpenAlexW2987535581

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.