The Prognostic Value of BRAF Mutation in Colorectal Cancer and Melanoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Mutation of BRAF is a predominant event in cancers with poor prognosis such as melanoma and colorectal cancer. BRAF mutation leads to a constitutive activation of mitogen activated protein kinase pathway which is essential for cell proliferation and tumor progression. Despite tremendous efforts made to target BRAF for cancer treatment, the correlation between BRAF mutation and patient survival is still a matter of controversy.

Methods/Principal Findings

Clinical studies on the correlation between BRAF mutation and patient survival were retrieved from MEDLINE and EMBASE databases between June 2002 and December 2011. One hundred twenty relevant full text studies were categorized based on study design and cancer type. Publication bias was evaluated for each category and pooled hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using random or fixed effect meta-analysis based on the percentage of heterogeneity. Twenty six studies on colorectal cancer (11,773 patients) and four studies on melanoma (674 patients) were included in our final meta-analysis. The average prevalence of BRAF mutation was 9.6% in colorectal cancer, and 47.8% in melanoma reports. We found that BRAF mutation increases the risk of mortality in colorectal cancer patients for more than two times; HR = 2.25 (95% CI, 1.82–2.83). In addition, we revealed that BRAF mutation also increases the risk of mortality in melanoma patients by 1.7 times (95% CI, 1.37–2.12).

Conclusions

We revealed that BRAF mutation is an absolute risk factor for patient survival in colorectal cancer and melanoma.     

Prognostic Role of microRNA-21 in Colorectal Cancer: a Meta-Analysis

Background

To date, many studies have shown that microRNAs (miRNA) exhibit altered expression in various cancers and may play an important role as prognostic biomarker of cancers. The present meta-analysis summarizes the recent advances in the use of microRNA-21 (miR-21) in the assessment of colorectal cancer and analyzes the prognostic role of miR-21 for survival outcome.

Methodology/Principal Findings

The present meta-analysis was performed by searching PubMed through multiple search strategies. Data were extracted from studies comparing overall survival (OS) in patients with colorectal cancer who showed higher expression of miR-21 than similar patients. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) of miR-21 for survival and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Seven studies with a total of 1174 patients were included this meta-analysis. For overall survival (OS), the pooled hazard ratio (HR) of higher miR-21 expression in colorectal cancer was 1.76 (95% CI: 1.34–2.32, P=0.000). After elimination of heterogeneity, the pooled HR was 2.32 (95% CI: 1.82–2.97, P=0.000), which was found to significantly predict poorer survival. The subgroup analysis suggested that elevated miR-21 level and patients’ survival correlated with III/IV stage (HR=5.35, 95% CI: 3.73–7.66).

Conclusions/Significance

The present findings suggest that high expression of miR-21 might predict poor prognosis in patients with colorectal cancer.     

Prognostic Value of LGR5 in Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Objective

Leucine-rich repeat-containing G protein-coupled receptor 5 (LGR5) has recently been reported to be a marker of cancer stem cells (CSCs) in colorectal cancer (CRC), and the prognostic value of LGR5 in CRC has been evaluated in several studies. However, the conclusions remain controversial. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the association between the expression of LGR5 and the outcome of CRC patients by performing a meta-analysis.

Methods

We systematically searched for relevant studies published up to February 2014 using the PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and Wangfang databases. Only articles in which LGR5 expression was detected by immunohistochemistry were included. A meta-analysis was performed using STATA 12.0, and pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to estimate the strength of the association between LGR5 expression and the prognosis of CRC patients.

Results

A total of 7 studies comprising 1833 CRC patients met the inclusion criteria, including 6 studies comprising 1781 patients for overall survival (OS) and 3 studies comprising 528 patients for disease-free survival (DFS). Our results showed that high LGR5 expression was significantly associated with poor prognosis in terms of OS (HR: 1.87, 95% CI: 1.23–2.84; P = 0.003) and DFS (HR: 2.44, 95% CI: 1.49–3.98; P<0.001). Further subgroup analysis revealed that many factors, including the study region, number of patients, follow-up duration and cutoff value, affected the significance of the association between LGR5 expression and a worse prognosis in patients with CRC. In addition, there was no evidence of publication bias, as suggested by Begg’s and Egger’s tests.

Conclusions

The present meta-analysis indicated that high LGR5 expression was associated with poor prognosis in patients with CRC and that LGR5 is an efficient prognostic factor in CRC.     

The Prognostic Significance of Metabolic Response Heterogeneity in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Background

Tumoral heterogeneity is a major determinant of resistance in solid tumors. FDG-PET/CT can identify early during chemotherapy non-responsive lesions within the whole body tumor load. This prospective multicentric proof-of-concept study explores intra-individual metabolic response (mR) heterogeneity as a treatment efficacy biomarker in chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

Methods

Standardized FDG-PET/CT was performed at baseline and after the first cycle of combined sorafenib (600mg/day for 21 days, then 800mg/day) and capecitabine (1700 mg/m²/day administered D1-14 every 21 days). MR assessment was categorized according to the proportion of metabolically non-responding (non-mR) lesions (stable FDG uptake with SUVmax decrease <15%) among all measurable lesions.

Results

Ninety-two patients were included. The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 8.2 months (95% CI: 6.8–10.5) and 4.2 months (95% CI: 3.4–4.8) respectively. In the 79 assessable patients, early PET-CT showed no metabolically refractory lesion in 47%, a heterogeneous mR with at least one non-mR lesion in 32%, and a consistent non-mR or early disease progression in 21%. On exploratory analysis, patients without any non-mR lesion showed a significantly longer PFS (HR 0.34; 95% CI: 0.21–0.56, P-value <0.001) and OS (HR 0.58; 95% CI: 0.36–0.92, P-value 0.02) compared to the other patients. The proportion of non-mR lesions within the tumor load did not impact PFS/OS.

Conclusion

The presence of at least one metabolically refractory lesion is associated with a poorer outcome in advanced mCRC patients treated with combined sorafenib-capecitabine. Early detection of treatment-induced mR heterogeneity may represent an important predictive efficacy biomarker in mCRC.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01290926     

Role of Kras Status in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Receiving First-Line Chemotherapy plus Bevacizumab: A TTD Group Cooperative Study

Background

In the MACRO study, patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) were randomised to first-line treatment with 6 cycles of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (XELOX) plus bevacizumab followed by either single-agent bevacizumab or XELOX plus bevacizumab until disease progression. An additional retrospective analysis was performed to define the prognostic value of tumour KRAS status on progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and response rates.

Methodology/Principal Findings

KRAS data (tumour KRAS status and type of mutation) were collected by questionnaire from participating centres that performed KRAS analyses. These data were then cross-referenced with efficacy data for relevant patients in the MACRO study database. KRAS status was analysed in 394 of the 480 patients (82.1%) in the MACRO study. Wild-type (WT) KRAS tumours were found in 219 patients (56%) and mutant (MT) KRAS in 175 patients (44%). Median PFS was 10.9 months for patients with WT KRAS and 9.4 months for patients with MT KRAS tumours (p = 0.0038; HR: 1.40; 95% CI:1.12–1.77). The difference in OS was also significant: 26.7 months versus 18.0 months for WT versus MT KRAS, respectively (p = 0.0002; HR: 1.55; 95% CI: 1.23–1.96). Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that KRAS was an independent variable for both PFS and OS. Responses were observed in 126 patients (57.5%) with WT KRAS tumours and 76 patients (43.4%) with MT KRAS tumours (p = 0.0054; OR: 1.77; 95% CI: 1.18–2.64).

Conclusions/Significance

This analysis of the MACRO study suggests a prognostic role for tumour KRAS status in patients with mCRC treated with XELOX plus bevacizumab. For both PFS and OS, KRAS status was an independent factor in univariate and multivariate analyses.     

High BRAF Mutation Frequency and Marked Survival Differences in Subgroups According to KRAS/BRAF Mutation Status and Tumor Tissue Availability in a Prospective Population-Based Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Cohort

RAS and BRAF mutations impact treatment and prognosis of metastatic colorectal cancer patients (mCRC), but the knowledge is based on trial patients usually not representative for the general cancer population. Patient characteristics, treatment and efficacy according to KRAS, BRAF and MSI status were analyzed in a prospectively collected unselected population-based cohort of 798 non-resectable mCRC patients. The cohort contained many patients with poor performance status (39% PS 2-4) and elderly (37% age>75), groups usually not included in clinical trials. Patients without available tissue micro array (TMA) (42%) had worse prognostic factors and inferior survival (all patients; 7m vs 11m, chemotherapy-treated;12m vs 17m). The 92 patients (21%) with BRAF mutation had a poor prognosis regardless of microsatellite instability, but receipt of 1-2^nd chemotherapy was similar to wildtype BRAF patients. Median survival in this cohort varied from 1 month in BRAF mutated patients not given chemotherapy to 26 months in wildtype KRAS/BRAF patients <75 years in good PS. TMA availability, BRAF mutation and KRAS mutation were all independent prognostic factors for survival. The observed 21% BRAF mutation incidence is higher than the previously and repeatedly reported incidence of 5-12% in mCRC. Screening for BRAF mutations before selection of treatment is relevant for many patients, especially outside clinical trials. A BRAF mutation only partly explained the very poor prognosis of many mCRC patients. Survival in unselected metastatic colorectal cancer patients is extremely variable and subgroups have an extremely short survival compared to trial patients. Patients without available TMA had worse prognostic factors and shorter survival, which questions the total generalizability of present TMA studies and implies that we lack information on the biologically worst mCRC cases. Lack of available tissue is an important underexposed issue which introduces sample bias, and this should be recognized more clearly when conclusions are made from translational mCRC studies.     

A Meta-Analysis of SMAD4 Immunohistochemistry as a Prognostic Marker in Colorectal Cancer

AIM: SMAD4 immunohistochemistry is considered a valuable prognostic marker in colorectal cancer, but individual studies have often been small and the results variable. A meta-analysis could potentially clarify these findings. METHODS: In September 2014, a Pubmed and Google Scholar search was conducted to find publications that reported the prognostic value of SMAD4 expression. A meta-analysis was performed to clarify the association between SMAD4 expression and survival outcomes. RESULTS: 137 studies were found, of which 13 were considered eligible. The studies consisted of a total of 3800 patients. Three different endpoints were taken into account, namely, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). In addition, the studies were divided into univariate and multivariate analyses. The pooled hazard ratios were given as follows: univariate CSS = 1.75 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.93-3.32; z= 1.69; P= .09]; multivariate CSS = 2.17 (95% CI: 1.56-3.01; z= 4.65; P= .000); univariate DFS = 2.11 (95% CI: 1.36-3.28; z= 3.32; P= .001); multivariate DFS = 2.15 (95% CI: 1.56-3.01; z= 4.65; P= .000); univariate OS and DFS = 2.30 (95% CI: 1.41-3.73; z= 3.36; P= .001); univariate OS = 2.28 (95% CI: 1.30-4.00; z= 2.89; P= .004). CONCLUSION: The results of the presented meta-analyses indicate that SMAD4 expression status using immunohistochemistry is a prognostic marker for patient survival.     

Prognostic Value of Human Equilibrative NucleosideTransporter1 in Pancreatic Cancer Receiving Gemcitabin-Based Chemotherapy: A Meta-Analysis

Background

The potential prognostic value of human equilibrative nucleoside transporter1 in pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine-based chemotherapy is variably reported.

Objective

The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of literature evaluating human equilibrative nucleoside transporter1 expression as a prognostic factor in pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and to conduct a subsequent meta-analysis to quantify the overall prognostic effect.

Methods

Related studies were identified and evaluated for quality through multiple search strategies. Only studies analyzing pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were eligible for inclusion. Data were collected from studies comparing overall, disease-free and progression-free survival (OS, DFS and PFS) in patients with low human equilibrative nucleoside transporter1 levels and those having high levels. The hazard ratio (HR) and its 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were used to assess the strength of associations. Hazard ratios greater than 1 reflect adverse survival associated with low human equilibrative nucleoside transporter1 levels.

Results

A total of 12 studies (n = 875) were involved in this meta-analysis (12 for OS, 5 for DFS, 3 for PFS). For overall and disease-free survival, the pooled HRs of human equilibrative nucleoside transporter1 were significant at 2.93 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.37–3.64) and 2.67 (95% CI, 1.87–3.81), respectively. For progression-free survival, the pooled HR in higher human equilibrative nucleoside transporter1 expression in pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine-based chemotherapy was 2.76 (95% CI, 1.76–4.34). No evidence of significant heterogeneity or publication bias was seen in any of these studies.

Conclusion

These results support the case for a low human equilibrative nucleoside transporter1 level representing a significant and reproducible marker of adverse prognosis in pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine-based chemotherapy.     

Prognostic Role of Survivin in Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose

The objective of the present study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature investigating the survivin expression and its effects on bladder cancer prognosis.

Materials and Methods

We carefully searched online Pubmed, Cochrane Library and SCOPUS database from August 1997 to May 2013.

Results

A total of 14 articles met the eligibility criteria for this systematic review. The eligible studies included a total of 2,165 patients with a median number of 155 patients per study (range: 17–726). Of the 14 studies, nine evaluated immunohistochemistry in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue blocks. In non-muscle invasive bladder tumor, the pooled hazard ratio (HR) was statistically significant for recurrence-free survival (pooled HR, 1.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30–2.52), progression-free survival (pooled HR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.60–2.82), cancer-specific survival (pooled HR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.32–3.06), and overall survival (pooled HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.02–2.29). The overall HRs by survivin status were robust across advanced stages. When only adjusted survival data were included, statistically significant differences were identified for all survival subgroup analyses. There was no between-study heterogeneity in the effect of survivin status on the majority of meta-analyses. There was no clear evidence of publication bias in this meta-analysis.

Conclusions

Survivin expression indicates worse prognosis in patients with bladder cancer but the results should be interpreted with caution. It is necessary that better-designed studies with standardized assays need to provide a better conclusion about the relationship between survivin expression and the outcome of patients with bladder cancer.     

Prognostic Significance of Cyclin D1 Expression in Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Objective

Cyclin D1 plays a vital role in cancer cell cycle progression and is overexpressed in many human cancers, including colorectal cancer (CRC). However, the prognostic value of cyclin D1 overexpression in colorectal cancer is conflicting and heterogeneous. We conducted a meta-analysis to more precisely evaluate its prognostic significance.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search for relevant studies published up to January 2014 was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was used to estimate the effects.

Results

22 studies with 4150 CRC patients were selected to evaluate the association between cyclin D1 and overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and clinicopathological parameters. In a random-effects model, the results showed that cyclin D1 overexpression in CRC was significantly associated with both poor OS (HR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.63–0.85, P<0.001) and DFS (HR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.44–0.82, P = 0.001). Additionally, cyclin D1 overexpression was significantly associated with more relative older patients (≥60 years) (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44–0.89, P = 0.009), T3,4 tumor invasion (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57–0.85, P<0.001), N positive (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60–0.95, P = 0.016) and distant metastasis (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.36–0.99, P = 0.047) of CRC.

Conclusion

The meta-analysis results indicated that cyclin D1 is an unfavorable prognostic factor for CRC. Cyclin D1 overexpression might be associated with poor clinical outcome and some clinicopathological factors such as age, T category, N category and distant metastasis in CRC patients.     

Prognostic Significance of COX-2 Immunohistochemical Expression in Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of the Literature

Background

Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) is believed to be an important enzyme in the pathogenesis of colorectal cancer (CRC). Correlations between the expression of COX-2 with tumor growth and distant metastasis have become an issue; thus, attention has been paid to COX-2 as a prognostic factor. Various studies examined the relationship between COX-2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) overexpression with the clinical outcome in patients with colorectal cancer, but yielded conflicting results. The prognostic significance of COX-2 overexpression in colorectal cancer remains controversial.

Methods

Electronic databases updated to October 2012 were searched to find relevant studies. A meta-analysis was conducted with eligible studies which quantitatively evaluated the relationship between COX-2 overexpression and survival of patients with colorectal cancer. Survival data were aggregated and quantitatively analyzed.

Results

We performed a meta-analysis of 23 studies (n  =  4567 patients) that evaluated the correlation between COX-2 overexpression detected by IHC and survival in patients with colorectal cancer. Combined hazard ratios suggested that COX-2 overexpression had an unfavorable impact on overall survival (OS) (HR [hazard ratio]  =  1.193, 95% CI [confidence interval]: 1.02 ∼ 1.37), but not disease free survival (DFS) (HR  =  1.25, 95% CI: 0.99 ∼ 1.50) in patients with colorectal cancer.

Conclusions

Cox-2 overexpression in colorectal cancer detected by IHC appears to have slightly worse overall survival. However, the prognostic value of COX-2 on survival in colorectal cancer still needs further large-scale prospective trials to be clarified.     

Prognostic Value of Cancer Stem Cell Marker ALDH1 Expression in Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

Many studies have indicated the prognostic and clinicopathological value of aldehyde dehydrogenase 1 (ALDH1) in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients still remains controversial. Thus we performed this study to clarify the relationship between high ALDH1 expression in CRC and its impact on survival and clinicopathological features.

Methods

Publications for relevant studies in Pubmed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) through April 2015 were identified. Only articles describing ALDH1 antigen with immunohistochemistry in CRC were included. The software RevMan 5.1 was used to analyze the outcomes, including 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and clinicopathological features.

Results

9 studies with 1203 patients satisfying the criteria were included. The overall rate of high ALDH1 expression was 46.5% by immunohistochemical staining. High ALDH1 expression as an independent prognostic factor was significantly associated with the 5-year OS and DFS (OR = 0.42, 95%CI: 0.26–0.68, P = 0.0004; OR = 0.38, 95%CI: 0.24–0.59, P < 0.0001, respectively). High ALDH1 expression was highly correlated with the tumor (T) stage (T3 + T4 vs. T1 + T2; OR = 2.16, 95%CI: 1.09–4.28, P = 0.03), lymph node (N) stage (N1 + N2 vs. N0; OR = 1.8; 95%CI: 1.17–2.79, P = 0.008), and tumor differentiation (G3 vs. G1 + G2; OR = 1.88; 95%CI: 1.07–3.30, P = 0.03). However, high ALDH1 expression was not significantly correlated with the patient age (>60 years old vs. <60 years old; OR = 1.11, 95%CI: 0.63–1.94, P = 0.72).

Conclusions

High ALDH1 expression indicates a poor prognosis in CRC patients. Moreover, high ALDH1 expression correlates with the T stage, N stage, and tumor differentiation, but not with age.     

Prognostic Value and Clinicopathological Differences of HIFs in Colorectal Cancer: Evidence from Meta-Analysis

Background

The prognostic value of HIFs in colorectal cancer was evaluated in a large number of studies, but the conclusions were inconclusive. Meanwhile, clinicopathologic differences of HIF-1α and HIF-2α were rarely compared in recent studies.

Methodology

Identical search strategies were used to search relevant literatures in the PubMed and Web of Science databases. The prognostic significances and clinicopathological differences of HIFs in CRC were analyzed.

Principal Findings

A total of 23studies comprising 2984 CRC patients met the inclusion criteria. The results indicated that overexpressed HIFs were significantly associated with increase of mortality risk, including overall survival (OS) (HR 2.06 95%CI 1.55–2.74) and disease free survival (HR 2.84, 95%CI 1.87–4.31). Subgroup analysis revealed that both overexpressed HIF-1α and HIF-2α had correlations with worse prognosis. The pooled HRs were 2.01 (95% CI: 1.55–2.6) and 2.07(95% CI: 1.01–4.26). Further subgroup analysis on HIF-1α was performed by study location, number of patients, quality score and cut-off value. The results showed that HIF-1α overexpression was significantly associated with poor OS, particularly in Asian countries (HR 2.3, 95% CI: 1.74–3.01), while not in European or other countries. In addition, overexpression of HIF-1α was closely related with these clinicopathological features, including Dukes'' stages (OR 0.39, 95% CI: 0.17–0.89), UICC stages (OR 0.42 95% CI: 0.3–0.59), depth of invasion (OR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.51–0.99), lymphnode status (OR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.32–0.73) and metastasis (OR 0.29, 95% CI: 0.11–0.81). While overexpression of HIF-2α was only associated with grade of differentiation (OR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.29–0.81).

Conclusions

This study showed that both HIF-1α and HIF-2α overexpression were associated with an unfavorable prognosis. HIF-1α overexpression seemed to be associated with worse prognosis in Asian countries. Additionally, HIF-1α and HIF-2α indicated distinct clinicopathologic features.     

Analysis of BRAF Mutation in Primary and Metastatic Melanoma

Mutation of BRAF has been proposed to contribute to melanoma development. However, it remains unclear whether or not BRAF mutation is associated with any particular stage of melanoma progression. Tumor biopsy specimens from patients with melanoma were analyzed to determine whether the frequency of BRAF mutation in metastatic melanoma differed from primary melanoma. BRAF mutation was present in 15 of 23 (61%) patients with primary melanoma and in 7 of 12 (58%) patients with metastatic melanoma. These results suggest that BRAF mutation in melanoma is most likely to occur prior to the development of metastatic disease.     

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic and Prognostic Serum Biomarkers of Colorectal Cancer

Background

Our systematic review summarizes the evidence concerning the accuracy of serum diagnostic and prognostic tests for colorectal cancer (CRC).

Methods

The databases MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched iteratively to identify the relevant literature for serum markers of CRC published from 1950 to August 2012. The articles that provided adequate information to meet the requirements of the meta-analysis of diagnostic and prognostic markers were included. A 2-by-2 table of each diagnostic marker and its hazard ratio (HR) and the confidence interval (CI) of each prognostic marker was directly or indirectly extracted from the included papers, and the pooled sensitivity and specificity of the diagnostic marker and the pooled HR and the CI of the prognostic marker were subsequently calculated using the extracted data.

Results

In total, 104 papers related to the diagnostic markers and 49 papers related to the prognostic serum markers of CRC were collected, and only 19 of 92 diagnostic markers were investigated in more than two studies, whereas 21 out of 44 prognostic markers were included in two or more studies. All of the pooled sensitivities of the diagnostic markers with > = 3 repetitions were less than 50%, and the meta-analyses of the prognostic markers with more than 3 studies were performed, VEGF with highest (2.245, CI: 1.347–3.744) and MMP-7 with lowest (1.099, CI: 1.018–1.187)) pooled HRs are presented.

Conclusions

The quality of studies addressing the diagnostic and prognostic accuracy of the tests was poor, and the results were highly heterogeneous. The poor characteristics indicate that these tests are of little value for clinical practice.     

Prognostic Value,Clinicopathologic Features and Diagnostic Accuracy of Interleukin-8 in Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background

The prognostic value and diagnostic accuracy of Interleukin-8 (IL-8) in colorectal cancer have been assessed with several studies, but the conclusions were inconclusive. Thus we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of IL-8 expression on colorectal cancer prognosis, clinicopathologic features and diagnostic accuracy.

Methods

Comprehensive search strategies were used to search relevant literature in the PubMed, EBSCO and the ISI Web of Science databases. The correlation between IL-8 expression and prognosis, clinicopathologic features and diagnostic accuracy was analyzed.

Results

A total of 18 articles met the inclusion criteria, including 1509 patients for clinicopathologic features or prognosis evaluation and 725 participants for diagnostic evaluation. The results suggested that overexpression of IL-8 was significantly associated with poor prognosis in colorectal cancer (HR = 1.54, 95%CI 1.03–2.32), especially in Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) stage IV patients (HR = 2.28, 95%CI 1.60–3.25). With further subgroup analysis, we found that high IL-8 level in serum was significantly correlated with poor prognosis (HR = 2.13, 95%CI 1.49–3.05). In addition, significant correlations were observed between high IL-8 expression and advanced stage (OR = 3.01, 95%CI 1.98–4.56), lymphatic metastasis (OR = 2.24, 95%CI 1.39–3.63), and liver metastasis (OR = 3.47, 95%CI 1.74–6.89). Moreover, IL-8 had high diagnostic accuracy, with pooled sensitivity 0.70(95%CI 0.66–0.74), specificity 0.91(95%CI 0.86–0.94), positive likelihood ratio (LR) 7.00(95%CI 2.48–19.73), negative LR 0.24(95%CI 0.09–0.64), diagnostic OR 24.00(95%CI 5.52–104.38).

Conclusions

This study showed that IL-8 could be a potential indicator for detecting colorectal cancer and predicting prognosis. In addition, high IL-8 level was significantly correlated with advanced stage, lymphatic metastasis, liver metastasis.     

The Role of Adiponectin in Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Published results suggests that high adiponectin level may decrease the risk of breast cancer. However, available evidence on breast cancer is conflicting. Therefore a meta-analysis was performed to assess the association between blood adiponectin and breast cancer risk. PubMed database, Web of Science, Elsevier Science, Springer Link and bibliographies of retrieved articles were searched for epidemiological studies published up to March 2013. Meta-analysis was performed on the combined effect values (OR) as well as standardized mean difference (SMD) including 17 studies. Fixed or random effect pooled measure was selected on the basis of homogeneity test among studies. The publication bias was assessed by the Egger’s regression asymmetry test and Begg’s rank correlation test with Begg’s funnel plot. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analysis were also performed. A total of 13 studies involving 3578 breast cancer cases and 4363 controls contributed to the OR analysis. The high adiponectin level did not significantly affect breast cancer risk (OR=0.902, 95% CI=0.773–1.053). After excluding articles that were the key contributors to between-study heterogeneity, the OR of high adiponectin level was associated with decreased breast cancer risk (OR=0.838, 95% CI=0.744–0.943). There was a significantly association between high adiponectin level and postmenopausal breast cancer women (OR=0.752, 95%CI=0.604-0.936); and it was not associated with premenopausal breast cancer women (OR=0.895, 95%CI=0.638-1.256). The result of pooled measure on SMD was that the high adiponectin level was associated with decreased breast cancer risk (SMD= -0.348, 95% CI= -0.533--0.614) after excluding articles which were the key contributors to between-study heterogeneity. Our findings indicate that high adiponectin level might decrease the risk of postmenopausal breast cancer. More randomized clinical trials and observational studies are needed to confirm this association with underlying biological mechanisms in the future.     

The Prognostic Value of p16 Hypermethylation in Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background

The prognostic value of p16 promoter hypermethylation in cancers has been evaluated for several years while the results remain controversial. We thus performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies assessing the impact of p16 methylation on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) to clarify this issue.

Methods

We searched Pubmed, Embase and ISI web of knowledge to identify studies on the prognostic impact of p16 hypermethylation in cancers. A total of 6589 patients from 45 eligible studies were included in the analysis. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated to estimate the effect using random-effects model.

Results

The analysis indicated that p16 hypermethylation had significant association with poor OS of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (HR 1.74, 95% CI: 1.36–2.22) and colorectal cancer (CRC) (HR 1.80; 95% CI 1.27–2.55). Moreover, the significant correlation was present between p16 hypermethylation and DFS of NSCLC (HR 2.04, 95% CI: 1.19–3.50) and head and neck cancer (HR 2.24, 95% CI: 1.35–3.73). Additionally, in the analysis of the studies following REMARK guidelines more rigorously, p16 hypermethylation had unfavorable impact on OS of NSCLC (HR 1.79, 95% CI: 1.35–2.39) and CRC (HR 1.96, 1.16–3.34), and on DFS of NSCLC (HR 2.12, 95% CI: 1.21–3.72) and head and neck cancer (HR 2.24, 95% CI: 1.35–3.73).

Conclusions

p16 hypermethylation might be a predictive factor of poor prognosis in some surgically treated cancers, particularly in NSCLC.     

The Prognostic Value of Global DNA Hypomethylation in Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Aberrant methylation of the global genome has been investigated as a prognostic indicator in various cancers, but the results are controversial and ambiguous.

Methods and Findings

This meta-analysis presents pooled estimates of the evidence to elucidate this issue. We searched the electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, ISI Web of Science and the Cochrane library (up to August 2013) to identify all of the relevant studies. The association between the level of surrogates'' indexes of genome-wide hypomethylation (LINE-1, Alu and Sat–α) and the overall survival (OS) of cancer patients was examined. In addition, the pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with their 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were calculated to estimate the influences through fixed-effects and random-effects model. Finally, twenty studies with total population of 5447 met the inclusion criteria. The results indicate that the summary HRs for the studies employing LINE-1, Alu, and Sat-α repetitive elements also show that the global DNA hypomethylation have significant desirable effects on the tumour prognostic value. The pooled HRs (and CIs) of LINE-1, Alu and Sat-α were 1.83 (1.38–2.44), 2.00 (1.16–3.45), and 2.92 (1.04–8.25), with a heterogeneity measure index of I² (and p-value) shows of 66.6% (p = 0.001), 57.1% (p = 0.053) and 68.2% (p = 0.076) respectively. The meta-regression and subgroup analysis indicated that the percentage of hypomethylated sample of cancer patients is one source of heterogeneity.

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis findings support the hypothesis that the global DNA hypomethylation is associated with a detrimental prognosis in tumour patients.     

Single Gene Prognostic Biomarkers in Ovarian Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Purpose

To discover novel prognostic biomarkers in ovarian serous carcinomas.

Methods

A meta-analysis of all single genes probes in the TCGA and HAS ovarian cohorts was performed to identify possible biomarkers using Cox regression as a continuous variable for overall survival. Genes were ranked by p-value using Stouffer’s method and selected for statistical significance with a false discovery rate (FDR) <.05 using the Benjamini-Hochberg method.

Results

Twelve genes with high mRNA expression were prognostic of poor outcome with an FDR <.05 (AXL, APC, RAB11FIP5, C19orf2, CYBRD1, PINK1, LRRN3, AQP1, DES, XRCC4, BCHE, and ASAP3). Twenty genes with low mRNA expression were prognostic of poor outcome with an FDR <.05 (LRIG1, SLC33A1, NUCB2, POLD3, ESR2, GOLPH3, XBP1, PAXIP1, CYB561, POLA2, CDH1, GMNN, SLC37A4, FAM174B, AGR2, SDR39U1, MAGT1, GJB1, SDF2L1, and C9orf82).

Conclusion

A meta-analysis of all single genes identified thirty-two candidate biomarkers for their possible role in ovarian serous carcinoma. These genes can provide insight into the drivers or regulators of ovarian cancer and should be evaluated in future studies. Genes with high expression indicating poor outcome are possible therapeutic targets with known antagonists or inhibitors. Additionally, the genes could be combined into a prognostic multi-gene signature and tested in future ovarian cohorts.