| Literature DB >> 32410584 |
Qiliang Peng1,2, Peifeng Zhao1,2, Yi Shen3, Ming Cheng4, Yongyou Wu5, Yaqun Zhu6,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is generally accepted that microRNA-20a (miR-20a) is aberrantly expressed in gastrointestinal cancer (GIC), and may be associated with the prognosis of GIC patients. Nevertheless, the clinical prognostic value of miR-20a expression in GIC remains controversial.Entities:
Keywords: Function exploration; Gastrointestinal cancer; Prognosis prediction; microRNA-20a
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32410584 PMCID: PMC7227208 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-020-06875-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Fig. 1Flow diagram of filtering studies
Characteristics of the included articles
| Author | Year | Country | Ethnicity | M/F | N | Age | Cancer type | TNM stage | Sample source | Methods | Endpoints | Median follow-up time | Hazard ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Schetter et al | 2008 | USA | Non-Asians | 66/18 | 84 | 65 | CRC | I-IV | Tissue | RT-PCR | OS | 68 | 2.20 (1.10–4.60) |
| Ayerbes et al | 2011 | Spain | Non-Asians | 25/13 | 38 | 63 | GIC | I-IV | Tissue | RT-PCR | OS | 22 | 1.07 (1.00–1.13) |
| Osawa et al | 2011 | Japan | Asians | 26/11 | 37 | 65 | GC | I-IV | Tissue | RT-PCR | OS | 38 | 1.20 (1.12–1.58) |
| Kim et al | 2012 | Korea | Asians | 57/34 | 91 | 61 | GC | I-IV | Tissue | RT-PCR | OS | 46 | 1.19 (0.83–1.69) |
| Wang et al | 2012 | China | Asians | 43/22 | 65 | 60 | GC | I-IV | Blood | RT-PCR | OS | 36 | 1.58 (1.10–2.25) |
| Huang et al | 2014 | China | Asians | 52/30 | 82 | 60 | GC | I-IV | Blood | RT-PCR | OS | 20 | 1.08 (1.02–1.15) |
| Chen et al | 2015 | China | Asians | NR | 580 | NR | CRC | I-IV | Tissue | RT-PCR | OS | NR | 1.88 (1.09–3.23) |
| Cheng et al | 2016 | China | Asians | 264/280 | 544 | 65 | CRC | I-IV | Tissue | RT-PCR | OS | 110 | 8.22 (4.47–15.12) |
| Yang et al | 2017 | China | Asians | 35/20 | 55 | 60 | GC | I-IV | Blood | RT-PCR | OS | 34 | 2.30 (1.60–3.32) |
| Peng et al | 2018 | China | Asians | 179/154 | 333 | 59 | GC | I-III | Blood | RT-PCR | OS | 36 | 2.07 (1.36–3.15) |
| Shao et al | 2018 | China | Asians | NR | NR | NR | GC | NR | Tissue | RT-PCR | OS | NR | 1.02 (1.01–1.03) |
| Pesta et al. | 2019 | Czech | Non-Asians | 18/10 | 28 | NR | CRC | I-IV | Blood | RT-PCR | OS | 36 | 1.67 (1.07–2.60) |
: F Female, M Male, N Number, NR Not report, CRC Colorectal cancer, GC Gastric cancer, GIC Gastrointestinal cancer, OS Overall survival
Fig. 2Forest plot of the relationship between miR-20a and overall survival in GIC. GIC, gastrointestinal cancer
Results of subgroup and meta-regression analyses
| Subgroup | Studies | HR (95%CI) | Heterogeneity (I | P | Meta-regression ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asian | 9 | 1.46 (1.25–1.71) | 91.5% | |||
| Non-Asian | 3 | 1.43 (0.92–2.23) | 74.1% | |||
| Gastric cancer | 7 | 1.25 (1.10–1.40) | 86.4% | |||
| Colorectal cancer | 4 | 2.71 (1.33–5.54) | 84.2% | |||
| Blood | 5 | 1.65 (1.14–2.37) | 87.1% | |||
| Tissue | 7 | 1.29 (1.11–1.50) | 90.2% | |||
| Large(>median) | 5 | 2.37 (1.29–4.33) | 86.2% | |||
| Small(<median) | 6 | 1.25 (1.10–1.43) | 80.4% |
Fig. 3Sensitivity analysis for the pooled hazard ratios of overall survival of patients with high level of miR-20a expression. The sensitivity analysis was conducted to evaluate the stability of the pooled HR for OS by omitting one study at each step
Fig. 4Top ten GO annotation results of miR-20a targets. a Biological processes (BP); b cell component (CC); c molecular function (MF). GO, gene ontology
Fig. 5Pathway enrichment results. a Top 30 pathways enriched by all the targets of miR-20a; b Top 30 pathways enriched by the hub nodes of miR-20a. The Database for Annotation, Visualization and Integrated Discovery (DAVID version 6.8) online tool was applied to perform the pathway enrichment analysis
Fig. 6The TGF-beta signaling pathway enriched in KEGG. Objects with pentagrams are acting locus by mapped genes. TGF-beta, Transforming growth factor-beta; KEGG, Kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes
Fig. 7PPI network construction results. a Betweenness centrality distributions of nodes; b Closeness centrality distributions of nodes; c Degree distributions of nodes. PPI, protein-protein interaction
Fig. 8The top three significant modules of the PPI network. The three modules were identified and reconstructed with Cytoscape. PPI, protein-protein interaction