ArticleMolecular therapy oncolytics2020
A 70-Gene Signature for Predicting Treatment Outcome in Advanced-Stage Cervical Cancer.
Article in Molecular therapy oncolytics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perspective of smart nanocapsule swallowable laser-guided for integrated sensing and crispr-mediated cancer gene editing.Cancer gene therapy · 2026Review
- Differentially Expressed Genes Identify FIGO Stage II Cervical Cancer Patients with a Higher Risk of Relapse in a Small Cohort.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Linking tumor immune infiltrate and systemic immune mediators to treatment response and prognosis in advanced cervical cancer.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Identification of a tumor microenvironment-related gene signature to improve the prediction of cervical cancer prognosis.Cancer cell international · 2021Article
- Integrated Analysis of ceRNA Regulatory Network Associated With Tumor Stage in Cervical Cancer.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- Integrated Profiles Analysis Identified a Coding-Non-Coding Signature for Predicting Lymph Node Metastasis and Prognosis in Cervical Cancer.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer in women worldwide. The current approaches still have limitations in predicting the therapy outcome of each individual because of cancer heterogeneity. The goal of this study was to establish a gene expression signature that could help when choosing the right therapeutic method for the treatment of advanced-stage cervical cancer. The 666 patients were collected from four independent datasets. The 70-gene expression signature was established using univariate Cox proportional hazard regression analysis. The 70-gene signature was significantly different between low- and high-risk groups in the training dataset (p = 4.24e-6) and in the combined three validation datasets (p = 4.37e-3). Treatment of advanced-stage cancer patients in the high-risk group with molecular-targeted therapy combined with chemoradiotherapy yielded a better survival rate than with only chemoradiotherapy (p = 0.0746). However, treatment of the patients in the low-risk group with the combined therapy resulted in significantly lower survival (p = 0.00283). Functional classification of 70 genes revealed involvement of the angiogenesis pathway, specifically phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase signaling (p = 0.040), extracellular matrix organization (p = 0.0452), and cell adhesion (p = 0.011). The 70-gene signature could predict the prognosis and indicate an optimal therapeutic modality in molecular-targeted therapy or chemotherapy for advanced-stage cervical cancer.
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.