| Literature DB >> 33016254 |
Tao Ye1, Zhangqun Ye1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-coding RNA-activated by DNA damage (NORAD), a novel identified lncRNA, was found to be aberrantly expressed in various types of cancer. This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the value of lncRNA NORAD as a prognostic biomarker in human cancers.Entities:
Keywords: LncRNA; NORAD; cancer; meta-analysis; prognosis
Year: 2020 PMID: 33016254 PMCID: PMC7543145 DOI: 10.1177/1533033820963586
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat ISSN: 1533-0338
Figure 1.Flow diagram showed the selection process of included studies.
Basic Characteristics of the Included Studies.
| Study/year | Country | Tumor type | Sample size | Specimens | Method | Cutoff value | NORAD expression | Age (high/low) | Male (high/low) Female (high/low) | Tumor size (high/low) | Tumor grade (high/low) | Tumor stage (high/low) | LNM | Outcome | HR | NOS | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | Low | High | Low | |||||||||||||||
| Hu, 2017 | China | HCC | 49 | Tissue | qRT-PCR | Median | 24 | 25 | < 60y, 11/11; ≧ 60y, 13/14 | 19/18; | < 5cm, 15/4; | NR | TNM stage: I-II, 17/6; III-IV, 7/19 | NR | NR | OS | SC | 7 |
| Huo, 2018 | China | Cervical cancer | 47 | Tissue | qRT-PCR | Median | 24 | 23 | < 50y, 9/11; ≧ 50y, 15/12 | NR | < 4cm, 8/14; ≥ 4cm, 16/9 | Well/Moderate, 15/19; Poor, 9/4 | FIGO stage: Ib-IIa, 8/17; IIb-IIIa, 16/6 | 12 | 3 | OS | SC | 7 |
| Lei, 2018 | China | Colon cancer | 80 | Tissue | qRT-PCR | Median | 40 | 40 | ≤ 55y, 15/22; > 55y, 25/18 | 23/27; 17/13 | < 5cm, 24/11; ≥ 5cm, 16/29 | NR | TNM stage: I-II, 30/18; III-IV, 10/22 | NR | NR | NR | NR | 6 |
| Li, 2017 | China | PC | 33 | Tissue | qRT-PCR | Median | 16 | 17 | < 60y, 8/7; ≧ 60y, 8/10 | 12/12; | < 2.5cm, 5/5; ≥ 2.5cm, 11/12 | NR | TNM stage: I-II, 14/15; III-IV, 2/2 | 6 | 8 | OS | SC | 7 |
| Li, 2018 | China | BC | 90 | Tissue | qRT-PCR | Mean | 37 | 53 | < 60y, 9/16; ≧ 60y, 28/37 | 31/37; | < 3cm, 24/39; ≥ 3cm, 13/14 | Low, 16/35; | Ta-T1, 14/33; | 7 | 3 | OS | MA | 7 |
| Miao, 2018 | China | GC | 50 | Tissue | qRT-PCR | NR | 34 | 16 | < 45y, 11/5; ≧ 45y, 23/11 | NR | < 4cm, 19/9; ≥ 4cm, 15/7 | NR | NR | 13 | 2 | OS | SC | 7 |
| Wu, 2017 | China | ESCC | 106 | Tissue | qRT-PCR | Median | 53 | 53 | < 60y, 32/25; ≧ 60y, 21/28 | 42/40; | < 4cm, 30/42; | Well/Moderate, 38/43; | UICC stage: I-II, 27/38; | 27 | 18 | OS | MA | 8 |
| Yang, 2018 | China | HCC | 95 | Tissue | qRT-PCR | NR | 58 | 37 | < 60y, 37/17; ≧ 60y, 21/20 | 51/29; | < 5cm, 25/28; ≥ 5cm, 33/9 | I-II, 37/27; | TNM stage: | NR | NR | OS | MA | 8 |
| Zhang, 2018 | China | CRC | 47 | Tissue | qRT-PCR | Median | 24 | 23 | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | OS | SC | 6 |
LNM: lymph node metastasis; HR: hazard ratios; NOS: Newcastle-Ottawa scale; PC: pancreatic cancer; BC: bladder cancer; GC: gastric cancer; ESCC: esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; HCC: hepatocellular carcinoma; CRC: colorectal cancer; qRT-PCR: quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction; NR: not reported; OS: overall survival; SC: survival curve; MA: multivariate analysis.
Figure 2.Forest plot for the relationship between lncRNA NORAD expression and OS.
Results of Association Between High NORAD Expression and Characteristics of Cancer Patients.
| Stratified analysis | No. of studies | No. of patients | Test of association | Test of heterogeneity | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pooled HR/OR 95% CI |
| I2 (%) |
| Model | |||
| OS | 8 | 517 | 1.67 (1.44, 1.95) | < 0.00001 | 48 | 0.06 | Fixed |
| Subgroup analysis of OS on HR availability | |||||||
| MA | 3 | 291 | 1.83 (1.12, 3.02) | 0.02 | 73 | 0.02 | Random |
| SC | 5 | 226 | 1.85 (1.49, 2.29) | < 0.00001 | 11 | 0.34 | Fixed |
| Age (young vs ≥ old) | 8 | 550 | 0.93 (0.63, 1.36) | 0.71 | 14 | 0.32 | Fixed |
| Gender (male vs. female) | 6 | 453 | 1.31 (0.84, 2.02) | 0.23 | 0 | 0.57 | Fixed |
| Tumor size (small vs large) | 8 | 550 | 1.19 (0.47, 2.59) | 0.83 | 81 | < 0.00001 | Random |
| Tumor grade (poor vs well+moderate) | 4 | 340 | 1.61 (1.01, 2.56) | 0.05 | 48 | 0.12 | Fixed |
| Tumor stage (high vs low) | 7 | 500 | 1.18 (0.45, 3.11) | 0.74 | 83 | < 0.00001 | Random |
| LNM (yes vs no) | 5 | 336 | 2.66 (1.60, 4.43) | 0.0002 | 47 | 0.11 | Fixed |
HR: hazard ratios; OR: odds ratios; CI: confidence intervals; OS: overall survival; MA: multivariate analysis; SC: survival curve; LNM: lymph node metastasis.
Figure 3.(A) Sensitivity analysis for the meta-analysis of OS; (B) Begg’s test for the meta-analysis of OS.
Figure 4.Forest plots for the relationship between NORAD expression and clinicopathological parameters: (A) tumor grade; (B) tumor stage; (C) lymph node metastasis.
Figure 5.Forest plots for the relationship between lncRNA NORAD expression and clinicopathological parameters: (A) age; (B) gender; (C) tumor size.