| Literature DB >> 29581870 |
Meng Li1,2, Xing Zhang1,2, Xiaoqing Xu1,2, Jiubin Wu3, Kaiwen Hu4, Xiuwei Guo1, Peitong Zhang1.
Abstract
Several studies were conducted to explore the prognostic significance of Twist in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), however, contradictory results in different studies were reported. To this end, we presented a systematic review aiming to summarize the prognostic significance of Twist in patients with NSCLC. 5 studies involving a total of 572 patients were identified. The result indicated that high Twist expression was significantly associated with a worse overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.19, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 1.64-2.94, p < 0.001; I2 = 0.0%, fixed effect), recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR = 2.476, 95% CI = 1.728-3.547, p < 0.001; I2 = 0.0%, fixed effect) and lymph node or other metastasis (odds rate (OR) = 0.419, 95% CI = 0.259-0.679, P < 0.001, fixed effect). Subgroup analysis revealed that the expression of Twist in Chinese patients might be more closely associated with the prognosis of NSCLC than in American patients. Overall, these results indicated that Twist over-expression in patients with NSCLC might be related to poor prognosis and serves as an unfavorable predictor of poor clinicopathological prognosis factor.Entities:
Keywords: Twist; meta-analysis; non-small cell lung cancer; prognosis
Year: 2018 PMID: 29581870 PMCID: PMC5865696 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.24489
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Figure 1Flow diagram of study selection process
Characteristics of the included studies
| study | Country | Sample size ( | Histology type (AC%) | Twist positive (%) | Outcome | Cut-off | Analysis | Follow-up (M) | recruitment time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hung, J. J, 2009 | China | 87 | 62.10% | 36.8 | RFS/ OS | Positive > 50% | U | Median43.2 (20 to 52.2) | 2003–2004 |
| Jiang W, 2012 | China | 137 | 59.90% | 40 | RFS/ OS | Positive > 60% | U | Median 39 (24.9 to 49.3) | 2006–2010 |
| Hui LP, 2013 | China | 120 | 47.50% | 38.3 | OS | Normal: 0-1; overexpression: 2-9 | M | Median 30.8 (3 to 72) | 2001–2010 |
| Lv TF, 2015 | America | 75 | 96.00% | 34.7 | OS | low: ≤ 1; overexpression: ≥ 2 | NM | NM | 2004–2009 |
| Zhou Y, 2016 | China | 153 | 17.00% | 78.4 | OS | low:< 4; overexpression: ≥ 4 | U / M | Median 57(4 to 95) | 2002–2004 |
RFS recurrence-free survival; AC adenocarcinoma; U univariate analyses; M multivariate analyses; NM no mention.
Figure 2Forest plot of the correlation between twist and OS in NSCLC patients
Meta-analysis of twist overexpression and prognosis in NSCLC
| Categories | Studies (patients) | HR (95% CI) | I2 (%) | PH | Z | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RFS | 3 (377) | 2.476 (1.728–3.547) | 0.0 | 0.414 | 4.94 | < 0.001 |
| Univariate analyses | 2 (224) | 3.219 (1.826–5.674) | 0 | 0.533 | 4.04 | < 0.001 |
| Multivariate analyses | 2 (273) | 1.877 (1.268–2.779) | 0 | 0.429 | 3.15 | 0.002 |
| Country (China) | 4 (497) | 2.235 (1.619–3.086) | 10.8 | 0.339 | 4.89 | < 0.001 |
| Follow-up (M) > 36 | 3 (410) | 2.476 (1.728– 3.547) | 0 | 0.414 | 4.94 | < 0.001 |
| Follow-up (M) < 36/NM | 2 (162) | 1.731 (1.045– 2.866) | 0 | 0.534 | 2.13 | 0.033 |
All pooled HRs were performed by fixed-effect model.
PH P-value for heterogeneity based on Q test.
P P-value for statistical significance based on Z test.
Figure 3Forest plot of the correlation between twist and RFS in NSCLC patients
Meta-analysis of Twist overexpression and clinicopathological features in NSCLC
| Categories | Studies (patients) | OR (95% CI) | I2 (%) | PH | Z | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (> 60/≤ 60) | 3 (348) | 1.086 (0.679–1.736) | 0 | 0.857 | 0.34 | 0.731 |
| Sex (Male / Female) | 5 (572) | 1.104 (0.726–1.679) | 47.0 | 0.109 | 0.46 | 0.644 |
| Tumor differentiation | 3 (348) | 1.981 (0.996–3.939) | 0 | 0.435 | 1.95 | 0.051 |
| Lymph node or other metastasis | 3 (348) | 2.384 (1.472–3.862) | 0 | 0.411 | 3.53 | < 0.001 |
| Histology (adenocarcinoma/non-adenocarcinoma) | 5 (572) | 0.810 (0.544–1.206) | 22.0 | 0.274 | 1.04 | 0.299 |
| Tumor stage (II, III, IV/I) | 4 (435) | 1. 883 (0.791–4.485) | 70.6 | 0.017 | 1.43 | 0. 153 |
All pooled ORs were performed by fixed-effect model except for tumor stage with random-effect model.
OR odds rate
PH P-value for heterogeneity based on Q test.
P P-value for statistical significance based on Z test.
Figure 4Forest plots showing the OR of Twist overexpression vs. normal Twist expression for clinicopathological features
(A) Age; (B) Sex; (C) Tumor differentiation; (D) Lymph node or other metastasis; (E) Histology; (F) Tumor stage. All pooled ORs were performed by fixed-effect model except for tumor stage with (NOTE: Weights are from random effects analysis). The difference between Twist overexpression and lymph node or other metastasis was statistically significant (OR = 2.384, P < 0.001).
Figure 5Effect of individual studies on the pooled HR for Twist overexpression and OS of NSCLC
The horizontal axis number 2.19 represents the overall HR, and the 1.64 and 2.94 represent the 95% CI.
Figure 6Funnel plot analysis to detect publication bias
There was no publication bias (P = 0.462).