ArticlePeerJ2019
An eight-mRNA signature predicts the prognosis of patients with bladder urothelial carcinoma.
Article in PeerJ, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- A CDKN2B-Associated Immune Prognostic Model for Predicting Immune Cell Infiltration and Prognosis in Esophageal Carcinoma.Clinical and experimental gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Article
- Identification of a five-immune gene model as an independent prognostic factor in hepatocellular carcinoma.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Construction and Validation of a 7-Immune Gene Model for Prognostic Assessment of Esophageal Carcinoma.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2020Article
- 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBladder cancer is one of the most common cancers, and its histopathological type is mainly bladder urothelial carcinoma, accounting for about 90%. The prognostic biomarkers of bladder cancer are classified into clinical features biomarkers and molecular biomarkers. Nevertheless, due to the existence of individual specificity, patients with similar pathological characteristics still have great differences in the risk of disease recurrence. Therefore, it is often inaccurate to predict the survival status of patients based on clinical characteristic biomarkers, and a prognostic molecular biomarker that can grade the risk of bladder cancer patients is needed.
methodsA total of three bladder urothelial carcinoma datasets were used in this study from the Cancer Genome Atlas database and Gene Expression Omnibus database. In order to avoid overfitting, all samples were randomly divided into one training set and three validation sets, which were used to construct and test the prognostic biomarker model of bladder urothelial carcinoma. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression were used to screen candidate mRNAs and construct prognostic biomarkers model. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were used to evaluate the predictive performance of the model.
resultsA prognostic biomarker model of bladder urothelial carcinoma combining with eight mRNA was constructed. Kaplan-Meier analyses indicated that a significant difference in the survival time of patients between the high-risk and the low-risk group. The area under the ROC curve were 0.632 (95% confidence interval (CI) [0.541-0.723]), 0.693 (95% CI [0.601-0.784]) and 0.686 (95% CI [0.540-0.831]) when the model was used to predict the patient's survival time in three validation datasets. The model showed high accuracy and applicability.
Indexed as
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.