| Literature DB >> 27764228 |
Ke-Yan Cheng1, Zhi-Lian Wang1, Qian-Yun Gu1, Min Hao1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Overexpression of survivin has been reported in many human tumors. However, the clinicopathological features associated with survivin overexpression in cervical carcinoma remain controversial. Thus, the current meta-analysis was performed to assess the clinicopathological significance of survivin in cervical carcinoma.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27764228 PMCID: PMC5072693 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165117
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Flow chart of study selection process for the meta-analysis.
Characteristics and results of the included studies.
| Study | Year | Country | No. of P. | No. of positive (%) | Method | Location | Cutoff V. | Sample | Stage | Clinicopathological variables | NOS | Antibody source | HR Estimate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lee J.P[ | 2005 | Korea | 64 | 51/53(96%) | IHC | Nu.& Cyt. | 20% | SCC | I-IV | D,LN,T,M,S | 8 | R&D | Sur. Curve |
| H. Zhu [ | 2010 | China | 101 | 63/81(78%) | RT-PCR | Cyt. | 5% | SCC&ADC | I-III | D,LN,M,T,S | 7 | Boster | Sur. Curve |
| H. Lu [ | 2010 | China | 142 | 90/107(84%) | IHC | Cyt. | 5% | SCC&ADC | I-IV | D,LN,T,S | 8 | Gene Company Ltd | Sur. Curve |
| X.Q. Cao [ | 2014 | China | 116 | 72/81(88%) | RT-PCR | Cyt. | 10% | SCC&ADC | I-IV | D,LN,T,S | 8 | Novus Biologicals | NA |
| H.Q. Liu [ | 2015 | China | 80 | 40/50(80%) | IHC | Nu.& Cyt. | 5% | SCC | I-II | D,LN,T,S | 8 | Labvision | Sur. Curve |
| S. Lu [ | 2005 | China | 51 | 32/41(78%) | IHC | Cyt. | 5% | SCC&ADC | I-IV | D,LN,M,S | 6 | Jinmen | NA |
| M. Wang [ | 2001 | China | 69 | 41/59(69%) | IHC | Cyt. | 10% | SCC | I-III | D,S | 6 | Santa Cruz | NA |
| Y.Q. Mu [ | 2007 | China | 75 | 45/50(90%) | IHC | Cyt. | 10% | SCC&ADC | I-IV | D,LN,S | 6 | Maixin Biologic | NA |
| D. Lu [ | 2012 | China | 59 | 35/49(71%) | IHC | Cyt. | 10% | SCC | I-IV | D,LN,S | 7 | Santa Cruz | NA |
| Y. Lan [ | 2005 | China | 41 | 26/31(84%) | IHC | Nu.& Cyt. | 10% | SCC&ADC | I-IV | D,S | 6 | Neomaker | NA |
| S.F. Wu [ | 2012 | China | 67 | 32/47(67%) | IHC | Cyt. | 10% | SCC | I-III | D,LN,S | 7 | Santa Cruz | NA |
No. of P, number of patients; NOS, Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale; RT-PCR, reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction; IHC, immunohistochemistry; Nu, nucleus; Cyt, cytoplasm; NA, not applicable; SCC, squamous cell carcinoma; ADC, adenocarcinoma; D, histological differentiation; LN, lymph node metastasis; T, depth of tumor invasion; M, metastasis; S, stage; Sur. Curve, survival curve.
Sensitivity analysis.
| Sensitivity analysis | Heterogeneity | Combined effect | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| I2 | tau2 | OR and 95% CI | P | |
| Including Lee J.P. study | 72% | 1.6959 | 0.144 (0.054–0.387) | 0 |
| Excluding Lee J.P. study | 28% | 0.3911 | 0.132 (0.062–0.282) | 0 |
Fig 2Forest plot of the pooled risk ratio (RR) for survivin expression in cervical carcinoma.
Highly significant heterogeneity was observed prior to the exclusion of Lee’s study.
Fig 3Forest plot depiction of survivin expression and odds ratios (ORs) for the following clinical pathological features: lymph node metastasis (A), tumor FIGO stage (B), tumor grade (C), tumor size (D), stromal involvement (E).
Meta-analysis evaluating the associations between survivin expression and clinicopathological variables.
| Clinicopathological variable | No. of | Cases | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| studies | OR | 95% CI | P value | Chi2 | P value | I2(%) | ||
| Lymph node status | 8 | 505 | 0.679 | 0.509–0.905 | 0.008 | 1.63 | 0.977 | 0.00% |
| FIGO stage | 9 | 533 | 0.843 | 0.626–1.137 | 0.264 | 2.28 | 0.971 | 0.00% |
| Tumor grade | 10 | 568 | 0.913 | 0.689–1.210 | 0.527 | 3.13 | 0.959 | 0.00% |
| Tumor size | 2 | 99 | 0.825 | 0.434–1.570 | 0.559 | 0.47 | 0.494 | 0.00% |
| Stromal involvement | 3 | 264 | 0.82 | 0.545–1.233 | 0.34 | 0.49 | 0.783 | 0.00% |
Fig 4Forest plot of the summarized hazard ratios (HRs) for the association between survivin expression and overall survival in patients with cervical carcinoma.
Subgroup analysis of summarized hazard ratios reflecting the relationship between survivin and overall survival in cervical cancer.
| Subgroup analysis | No. of | Number of | HR (95%Cls) | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| studies | patients | |||
| Overall | 3 | 238 | 1.129 (0.597–1.661) | 0 |
| HR estimate | ||||
| HR | 2 | 157 | 1.203 (0.463–1.943) | 0.001 |
| Sur. curve | 1 | 81 | 1.050 (0.285–1.815) | 0.007 |
| Histological type | ||||
| SCC | 1 | 50 | 1.186 (0.060–2.312) | 0.039 |
| ADC & SCC | 2 | 188 | 1.113 (0.509–1.716) | 0 |
| Method | ||||
| IHC | 2 | 188 | 1.203 (0.463–1.943) | 0.007 |
| RT-PCR | 1 | 81 | 1.050 (0.285–1.815) | 0.001 |
| Tumor stage | ||||
| I-II | 1 | 50 | 1.186 (0.060–2.312) | 0.039 |
| I-III | 1 | 81 | 1.050 (0.285–1.815) | 0.007 |
| I-IV | 1 | 107 | 1.216 (0.233–2.199) | 0.015 |
| Cutoff value | ||||
| 5% | 3 | 238 | 1.129 (0.597–1.661) | 0 |
Fig 5Sensitivity analysis of the summary odds ratio (OR) coefficients of the relationships between survivin expression and risk of cervical carcinoma.
Fig 6Egger’s funnel plot for the assessment of publication bias regarding the relationships between survivin expression and the following clinicopathological features: lymph node metastasis (A), tumor FIGO stage (B), tumor grade (C), tumor size (D), and stromal involvement (E).