| Literature DB >> 32696952 |
Jing Zhang1, Yanhui Gu1, Xiaoli Liu1, Ximin Rao1, Guichuan Huang2, Yao Ouyang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Numerous published studies have shown that S100A4 is frequently overexpressed in various human cancers. However, the association between S100A4 expression and prognosis or clinicopathological parameters in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains unclear. Therefore, a meta-analysis was performed to identify the significance of S100A4 in NSCLC.Entities:
Keywords: S100A4; meta analysis; non-small cell lung cancer
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32696952 PMCID: PMC7396424 DOI: 10.1042/BSR20201710
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biosci Rep ISSN: 0144-8463 Impact factor: 3.840
Figure 1Flow diagram of literature search and selection process
Characteristics of included studies in the meta-analysis
| Author | Year | Country | Language | Number of patients | Detection method | Gender: | Age: | Tumor size: | Differentiation: | LNM: | TNM stage: | Distant metastasis: | Pathological subtype: | Smoking history: | Survival information | NOS scores |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kimura [ | 2000 | Switzerland | English | 135 | IHC | NA | NA | NA | 14/7 | 39/11 | NA | 3/0 | NA | NA | OS (S) | 8 |
| Hu [ | 2005 | China | Chinese | 86 | IHC | 35/29 | 22/28 | 40/20 | 17/9 | 36/14 | 9/5 | NA | 32/27 | NA | NA | 6 |
| Han [ | 2008 | China | Chinese | 130 | IHC | 62/21 | 57/25 | NA | 45/11 | 70/12 | 68/10 | 22/2 | 43/8 | 47/16 | OS (M) | 7 |
| Matsubara [ | 2005 | Switzerland | English | 94 | IHC | NA | NA | NA | NA | 11/27 | 11/36 | NA | NA | NA | OS (S) | 8 |
| Miyazaki [ | 2006 | Japan | English | 92 | IHC | NA | NA | NA | NA | 29/9 | 23/7 | 35/20 | NA | NA | OS (S) | 8 |
| Qi [ | 2007 | China | Chinese | 116 | IHC | 49/33 | 38/44 | 53/23 | NA | 46/13 | 23/14 | NA | 29/26 | NA | OS (S) | 8 |
| Chen [ | 2008 | China | Chinese | 41 | IHC | 17/8 | 16/7 | 21/2 | 15/4 | 18/2 | 16/0 | NA | 11/10 | 8/6 | OS (S) | 6 |
| Liu [ | 2006 | China | Chinese | 47 | IHC | 10/3 | NA | NA | 12/5 | 21/8 | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | 6 |
| Sheng [ | 2006 | China | Chinese | 76 | IHC | NA | NA | NA | 22/14 | 30/8 | 38/14 | NA | 30/18 | NA | NA | 6 |
| Tsuna [ | 2009 | Japan | English | 66 | IHC | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | OS (S) | 7 |
| Tsuna [ | 2009 | Japan | English | 104 | IHC | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | OS (S) | 7 |
| Lin [ | 2009 | China | Chinese | 91 | IHC | 46/21 | 38/12 | 50/21 | NA | 32/6 | 23/3 | NA | 33/18 | NA | NA | 7 |
| Qin [ | 2009 | China | Chinese | 130 | IHC | 56/27 | 49/33 | NA | 48/8 | 68/14 | 65/13 | 21/3 | NA | 46/17 | OS (M) | 7 |
| Xu [ | 2009 | China | Chinese | 120 | IHC | 48/28 | 44/35 | NA | 33/11 | 18/31 | 55/25 | NA | 24/25 | NA | NA | 6 |
| Jung [ | 2010 | Korea | English | 67 | IHC | 43/10 | 18/6 | NA | NA | 25/4 | 16/3 | 2/0 | 27/10 | NA | OS | 8 |
| Yang [ | 2010 | China | Chinese | 90 | IHC | 38/13 | 22/9 | NA | 39/4 | 51/10 | 45/4 | NA | 33/11 | NA | NA | 7 |
| Li [ | 2011 | China | Chinese | 79 | IHC | 13/15 | 22/21 | NA | NA | 27/18 | 28/16 | NA | NA | 17/10 | OS (S) | 7 |
| Chen [ | 2012 | China | Chinese | 112 | IHC | 38/38 | 22/16 | 32/35 | 18/15 | NA | NA | 10/10 | 24/13 | NA | OS (S) | 6 |
| Zhang [ | 2013 | China | English | 204 | IHC | 114/59 | 67/29 | NA | 38/17 | 59/19 | 43/16 | NA | NA | 110/55 | OS (M) | 8 |
| Zhang [ | 2013 | China | Chinese | 89 | IHC | 45/7 | 39/8 | NA | 8/0 | 55/2 | 55/3 | 56/2 | 26/6 | NA | OS (M) | 7 |
| Yang [ | 2014 | China | Chinese | 67 | IHC | 30/11 | 29/13 | NA | 16/1 | 34/5 | NA | NA | 21/12 | NA | NA | 7 |
| Liu [ | 2015 | China | Chinese | 84 | IHC | 31/11 | 35/15 | 26/12 | 26/1 | 35/1 | 37/1 | NA | NA | NA | OS (S) | 7 |
| Stewart [ | 2016 | America | English | 81 | IHC | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | 6/94 | NA | OS | 8 |
| Chen [ | 2017 | China | Chinese | 106 | IHC | 35/19 | 24/15 | NA | NA | 31/5 | 33/10 | NA | 11/15 | 25/16 | OS (M) | 7 |
Abbreviations: M, multivariate analysis; NA, not available; S, survival curve.
Figure 2Forest plot for the association between S100A4 expression and OS
Figure 3Forest plot for the association between S100A4 expression and clinicopathological features
Forest plot for the association between S100A4 expression and clinicopathological features, including (A) gender, (B) age, (C) tumor size, (D) tumor differentiation, (E) LNM, (F) TNM stage, (G) smoking, (H) pathological subtype.
The correlation between S100A4 expression and clinicopathological features
| Clinicopathological features | Number of studies | Number of patients | OR (95% CI) | Heterogeneity | Model | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | 17 | 1659 | 0.641 | 0.95 (0.75–1.19) | 0.0 | 0.623 | fixed |
| Age | 16 | 1612 | 0.010 | 0.67 (0.49–0.91) | 44.5 | 0.028 | random |
| Tumor size | 6 | 530 | 0.209 | 1.96 (0.69–5.62) | 84.2 | <0.001 | random |
| Differentiation | 14 | 1411 | <0.001 | 2.20 (1.69–2.85) | 34.7 | 0.098 | fixed |
| LNM | 20 | 1944 | <0.001 | 3.70 (2.25–6.06) | 79.3 | <0.001 | random |
| TNM stage | 17 | 1695 | <0.001 | 3.08 (2.10–4.53) | 56.6 | 0.002 | random |
| Smoking | 6 | 690 | 0.673 | 1.08 (0.76–1.52) | 38.9 | 0.146 | fixed |
| Pathological subtype | 14 | 1272 | 0.020 | 1.77 (1.09–2.88) | 67.2 | <0.001 | random |
Publication bias by Begg’s test and Egger’s test
| Clinicopathological features | Number of studies | Estimates | Begg’s test ( | Egger’s test ( | Publication bias |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OS | 17 | HR + 95% CI | 0.343 | 0.440 | not significant |
| Gender | 17 | OR + 95% CI | 0.837 | 0.514 | not significant |
| Age | 16 | OR + 95% CI | 0.260 | 0.181 | not significant |
| Tumor size | 6 | OR + 95% CI | 0.707 | 0.615 | not significant |
| Differentiation | 14 | OR + 95% CI | 0.044 | 0.013 | significant |
| LNM | 20 | OR + 95% CI | 0.206 | 0.130 | not significant |
| TNM stage | 17 | OR + 95% CI | 0.096 | 0.077 | not significant |
| Smoking | 6 | OR + 95% CI | 0.452 | 0.297 | not significant |
| Pathological subtype | 14 | OR + 95% CI | 0.155 | 0.064 | not significant |