Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37907475›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2023

Prognosis of recurrence after complete resection in early-stage lung adenocarcinoma based on molecular alterations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Chu Zhou, Zhongying Jing, Wei Liu, Zihuan Ma, Siyao Liu, Yueyu Fang

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Chu ZhouDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210008, China.
Zhongying JingBeijing ChosenMed Clinical Laboratory Co. Ltd., Beijing, 100176, China.
Wei LiuBeijing ChosenMed Clinical Laboratory Co. Ltd., Beijing, 100176, China.
Zihuan MaBeijing ChosenMed Clinical Laboratory Co. Ltd., Beijing, 100176, China.
Siyao LiuBeijing ChosenMed Clinical Laboratory Co. Ltd., Beijing, 100176, China.
Yueyu FangDepartment of Medical Oncology, Nanjing PuKou People's Hospital, Nanjing, 211800, China. Fyymmy091120@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Molecular biomarkers have the potential to predict the recurrence risk of early-stage lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) after complete resection, but the study results are controversial. We aimed to clarify the association of molecular alterations with disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in early-stage LUAD with R0 resection. Comprehensive searches were conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for this systematic review and meta-analysis with date restrictions from 2012 to 2022. In the 18 included studies, data from a total of 7417 participants in 11 studies and 4167 participants in 9 studies were collected for the EGFR and KRAS meta-analyses, respectively. Two studies were assessed as having a moderate risk of bias, and the others were all assessed as having a high individual risk of bias. The molecular alterations in KRAS rather than EGFR, were associated with a high risk of recurrence for early-stage LUAD patients suffering from R0 resection, especially for those in pStage I, the pooled hazard ratios (HRs) of KRAS were 2.71 (95% CI, 1.81-4.06; I

Indexed as

Adenocarcinoma of LungLung NeoplasmsErbB ReceptorsHumansPrognosisProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)ErbB ReceptorsProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)

Identifiers

PMID37907475
PMCPMC10618289

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.