Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31690770›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2019

Genomic analysis of primary and recurrent gliomas reveals clinical outcome related molecular features.

Longbo Zhang, Zhiqiang Liu, Jin Li, Tianxiang Huang, Ying Wang, Lianpeng Chang, Wenjie Zheng, Yujie Ma, Fenghua Chen, Xuan Gong and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Genomic Profiling in Glioma Patients to Explore Clinically Relevant Markers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

19 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Longbo ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Zhiqiang LiuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Jin LiGeneplus-Beijing, Beijing, China.
Tianxiang HuangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Ying WangDepartment of Emergency, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Lianpeng ChangGeneplus-Beijing, Beijing, China.
Wenjie ZhengGeneplus-Beijing, Beijing, China.
Yujie MaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Fenghua ChenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Xuan GongDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Qianying YuanDepartment of Pharmacology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States.
Shannon TeawDepartment of Neurosurgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States.
Xinqi FangXiangya Medical School, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Tao SongDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Lei HuoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Xi LiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Xuefeng XiaGeneplus-Beijing, Beijing, China.
Zhixiong LiuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Jun WuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China. jianjuncs@foxmail.com.
Central South University · CNXiangya Hospital Central South University · CNYale University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tremendous efforts have been made to explore biomarkers for classification and grading on gliomas. The goal of this study was to identify more molecular features that are associated with clinical outcomes by comparing the genomic profiles of primary and recurrent gliomas and determine potential recurrence leading factors that are significantly enriched in relapse tumors. Hybrid capture based next generation sequencing (NGS) analysis was performed on 64 primary and 17 recurrent glioma biopsies. Copy number variation (CNV) was more frequent in recurrent tumors and CDKN2A/B loss was significantly enriched. In addition, overall mutations in cell cycle pathway are more common in relapse tumors. The patterns of gene sets, including IDH1/TERT and IDH1/TP53 exhibited significant difference between the groups. Survival analysis uncovered the worse disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) associated with altered copy number and excessive activation of CELL CYCLE pathway. High Tumor Mutation Burden (TMB) was also a biomarker with great potential for poor prognosis. The assessment of genomic characteristics in primary versus recurrent gliomas aids the discovery of potential predictive biomarkers. The prognostic value of TMB in gliomas was raised for the first time.

Indexed as

DNA Copy Number VariationsGliomaNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalAdultBiomarkers, TumorDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm ProteinsSurvival RateBiomarkers, TumorNeoplasm Proteins

Identifiers

PMID31690770
PMCPMC6831607
OpenAlexW2989292515

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.