ReviewCancer cell international2021
Clinical and prognostic significances of cancer stem cell markers in gastric cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Cancer cell international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- CHFR drives gastric cancer stemness and hepatic metastasis by suppressing ITCH-mediated ubiquitination and degradation of OCT4.Biology direct · 2026Article
- Advances in Gastric Cancer Research: Insights Into Carcinogenesis, the Tumor Microenvironment, Metastasis, and Factors Influencing Prognosis.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Review
- From steatosis to metastasis: microenvironmental reprogramming of the liver in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease.Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2026Review
- Harnessing Cancer Stem Cells and 3D Organoids in Unravelling Spatial and Cellular Heterogeneity in Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Umbilical Cord Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Wnt Pathway Modulation: A Novel Therapy for Liver Cirrhosis and Steatosis.Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2026Article
- Salinomycin as a death switch: how gastric cancer cells choose their demise.Cell death discovery · 2026Article
- CD44 upregulation in chronic liver disease marks the transition to hepatocellular carcinoma and portends poor prognosis.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Co-expression of cancer stem cell markers CD24 and CD133 in gastric cancer tissues: Clinicopathological and prognostic significance.World journal of stem cells · 2026Article
- Long non-coding RNA PP7080 enhances cancer stemness and tumorigenic features in oral cancer.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Article
- Linolenic Acid Inhibits Cancer Stemness and Induces Apoptosis by Regulating Nrf2 Expression in Gastric Cancer Cells.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025Article
- CD44v6-mediated regulation of gastric cancer stem cells: a potential therapeutic target.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Article
- Role of cancer stem cell heterogeneity in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- Clinical significance of "S" isoform of DCLK1 in different gastric cancer subtypes using newly produced monoclonal antibody.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2025Article
- Cell death mechanisms induced by gold nano-immunoconjugates-mediated photodynamic therapy against human oesophageal cancer stem cells.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Prognostic markers in oesophageal and gastric cancer review. Are they ready for clinical practice?ESMO gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Review
- Review
- Cordycepin Triphosphate as a Potential Modulator of Cellular Plasticity in Cancer via cAMP-Dependent Pathways: An In Silico Approach.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Prognostic value of PD‑L1 expression and CD68 macrophages in tumor nest of patients with primary gastric cancer.Oncology letters · 2024Article
- The Hyaluronan/CD44 Axis: A Double-Edged Sword in Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGastric cancer (GC) is considered one of the most lethal malignancies worldwide, which is accompanied by a poor prognosis. Although reports regarding the importance of cancer stem cell (CSC) markers in gastric cancer progression have rapidly developed over the last few decades, their clinicopathological and prognostic values in gastric cancer still remain inconclusive. Therefore, the current meta-analysis aimed to quantitatively re-evaluate the association of CSC markers expression, overall and individually, with GC patients' clinical and survival outcomes.
methodsLiterature databases including PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and Embase were searched to identify the eligible articles. Hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were recorded or calculated to determine the relationships between CSC markers expression positivity and overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS)/relapse-free survival (RFS), disease-specific survival (DSS)/ cancer-specific survival (CSS), and clinicopathological features.
resultsWe initially retrieved 4,425 articles, of which a total of 66 articles with 89 studies were considered as eligible for this meta-analysis, comprising of 11,274 GC patients. Overall data analyses indicated that the overexpression of CSC markers is associated with TNM stage (OR = 2.19, 95% CI 1.84-2.61, P = 0.013), lymph node metastasis (OR = 1.76, 95% CI 1.54-2.02, P < 0.001), worse OS (HR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.54-1.77, P < 0.001), poor CSS/DSS (HR = 1.69, 95% CI 1.33-2.15, P < 0.001), and unfavorable DFS/RFS (HR = 2.35, 95% CI 1.90-2.89, P < 0.001) in GC patients. However, CSC markers expression was found to be slightly linked to tumor differentiation (OR = 1.25, 95% CI 1.01-1.55, P = 0.035). Sub-analysis demonstrated a significant positive relationship between most of the individual markers, specially Gli-1, Oct-4, CD44, CD44V6, and CD133, and clinical outcomes as well as the reduced survival, whereas overexpression of Lgr-5, Nanog, and sonic hedgehog (Shh) was not found to be related to the majority of clinical outcomes in GC patients.
conclusionThe expression of CSC markers is mostly associated with worse outcomes in patients with GC, both overall and individual. The detection of a combined panel of CSC markers might be appropriate as a prognostic stratification marker to predict tumor aggressiveness and poor prognosis in patients with GC, which probably results in identifying novel potential targets for therapeutic approaches.
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.