| Literature DB >> 35308559 |
Jing Li1, Shanle Yan2, Xiaohui Zhang3, Mengqi Xiang4, Chuanhua Zhang5, Ling Gu3, Xiaoying Wei1, Chuanyun You3, Shenhua Chen3, Daxiong Zeng1, Junhong Jiang1.
Abstract
Background: D-dimer is a fibrin-degrading substance that is soluble and whose degradation is produced by plasma protein-mediated degradation of cross-linked fibrin. Previous investigations have shown a link between D-dimer and the mortality in lung cancer patients. However, different investigations varied whether D-dimer could predict prognosis in these patients.Entities:
Keywords: D-dimer; VTE; lung cancer; meta-analysis; mortality
Year: 2022 PMID: 35308559 PMCID: PMC8924589 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.853941
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) ISSN: 2296-858X
Figure 1Flow chart of projects' selection designed by PRISMA.
Characteristics of included studies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fan, S. | 2019 | China | SCLC | NALC | 60 | 82 | 81.7 | 60 (28–82) | IA | Plssma | RS | 3 |
| Minglei, Y. | 2019 | China | NSCLC | NALC | 24 | 376 | 60.6 | 58 (27–81) | IA | Plssma | RCT | 8 |
| Hou, C. | 2019 | China | NSCLC | NALC | 13.2 | 395 | 60.0 | 61 (35–81) | IA | Plssma | PCS | 6 |
| Huagang, L. | 2019 | China | NSCLC | NALC | 42 | 456 | 69.7 | 65 (56–69) | IA | Plssma | RS | 4 |
| Edyta I. W. | 2018 | Poland | LC | ALC | 30 | 95 | 75.0 | 67 (40–81) | IA | Plssma | PCS | 6 |
| Cuicui, Z. | 2018 | China | SCLC | NALC | 60 | 160 | 80.6 | 59 (23–83) | IA | Plssma | RS | 3 |
| Wenwen, S. | 2017 | China | NSCLC | ALC | 56 | 785 | 60.0 | ≥65 (41.6%) | IA | Plssma | PCS | 5 |
| Kaoru, S. | 2017 | Japan | NSCLC | ALC | 60 | 237 | 59.1 | 69 ± 9.7 | IA | Plssma | PCS | 7 |
| Zhu, L.-R. | 2016 | China | SCLC | NALC | 60 | 74 | 77.0 | 57 (42–80) | IA | Plssma | PCS | 6 |
| Magdalena, Z. | 2016 | Poland | NSCLC | NALC | 11.5 | 52 | 38.5 | 63 (58–70) | IA | Plssma | PCS | 7 |
| Koichi, F. | 2015 | Japan | NSCLC | ALC | 60 | 247 | 61.5 | 69 (31–85) | IA | Plssma | PCS | 6 |
| Yuezhen, W. | 2015 | China | NSCLC | NALC | 60 | 1931 | 70.0 | ≥65 (39.9%) | ELISA | Plssma | RS | 5 |
| Tuba, I. | 2015 | Turkey | LC | ALC | 60 | 72 | 77.8 | ≥60 (37.5%) | IA | Plasma | PCS | 6 |
| Ge, L.-P. | 2014 | China | NSCLC | NALC | 36 | 82 | 67.0 | 64 (44–72) | IA | Plasma | PCS | 6 |
| Heguo, J. | 2014 | China | NSCLC | ALC | 36 | 184 | 45.2 | ≥60 (34.1%) | IA | Plasma | PCS | 5 |
| Zhang, P.-P. | 2013 | China | NSCLC | NALC | 60 | 232 | 64.2 | 61 (30–86) | IA | Plasma | PCS | 6 |
| Cihan, A. | 2012 | Austria | LC | NALC | 24 | 182 | 56.5 | 62 (52–68) | IA | Plasma | PCS | 7 |
| Katsuhiro, M. | 2011 | Japan | NSCLC | NALC | 60 | 99 | 71.8 | 72 (35–88) | ELISA | Plasma | PCS | 6 |
| Altiay, G. | 2007 | Turkey | LC | ALC | 78 | 78 | 93.6 | 61 (37–82) | ELISA | Plasma | PCS | 7 |
SCLC, small cell lung cancer; NSCLC, non-small-cell lung cancer; LC, lung cancer; NALC, non-advanced lung cancer; ALC, advanced lung cancer; IA, immunoturbidimetric assay; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; RS, retrospecitive study; PCS, prospective cohort study; RCT, randomized controlled trial.
Figure 2Forest plot (Fixed and random-effects model) for the link between plasma D-dimer levels (highest vs. lowest category) and lung cancer-associated mortality. Subgroup analysis is grouped by disease states (non-advanced lung cancer and advanced lung cancer).
Stratified analysis of pooled hazard ratio risks of D-dimer in LC patients.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |
| Public year | 0.794 | ||
| After 2015 | 1.70 [1.38–2.10] | Q = 54.51, | |
| Before 2015 | 1.67 (1.22–2.29) | Q = 16.95, | |
| Country | 0.121 | ||
| China | 1.44 [1.19–1.75] | Q = 38.22, | |
| Non-China | 2.22 [1.58–3.13] | Q = 30.27, | |
| Population | 0.683 | ||
| SCLC | 1.86 [1.33–2.61] | Q = 40.12, | |
| NSCLC | 1.60 [1.33–1.92] | Q = 31.52, | |
| Follow-up months | 0.519 | ||
| ≥60 months | 1.89 [1.42–2.51] | Q = 49.03, | |
| <60 months | 1.52 [1.26–1.83] | Q = 22.44, | |
| Design | 0.074 | ||
| RS | 1.21 [0.96–1.53] | Q = 13.8, | |
| PCS | 1.93 [1.57–2.37] | Q = 49.21, | |
| Quality Score | 0.537 | ||
| <6 | 1.55 [1.15–2.09] | Q = 33.88, | |
| ≥6 | 1.74 [1.43–2.12] | Q = 34.18, | |
| Stage | <0.001 | ||
| NALC | 1.29 [1.15–1.44] | Q = 26.23, | |
| ALC | 2.91 [2.24–3.78] | Q = 6.38, | |
SCLC, small cell lung cancer; NSCLC, non-small-cell lung cancer; LC, lung cancer; NALC, non-advanced lung cancer; ALC, advanced lung cancer; RS, retrospecitive study; PCS, prospective cohort study; HR, hazard ratio.
Figure 3(A) Funnel plot for the link between plasma D-dimer levels (highest vs. lowest category) and lung cancer-associated mortality. (B) Filled funnel plot and meta trim-and-fill model. The blue dots indicate that these included studies require a corresponding study for correction, thus reducing bias.
Study Participant Characteristics at Enrollment.
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
|
| ||||
| Age, Median (Q1,Q3) | 64 (58, 70) | 63 (58, 69) | 64 (59, 70) | 0.144 |
| Gender, n (%) | 0.575 | |||
| female | 165 (31) | 79 (29) | 86 (32) | |
| male | 375 (69) | 191 (71) | 184 (68) | |
| BMI, Mean ± SD | 22.64 ± 3.16 | 22.62 ± 3.23 | 22.66 ± 3.1 | 0.881 |
| Pathological type, n (%) | 0.089 | |||
| Adenocarcinoma | 346 (64) | 161 (60) | 185 (69) | |
| Mixed lung cancer | 25 (5) | 13 (5) | 12 (4) | |
| Squamous carcinoma | 169 (31) | 96 (36) | 73 (27) | |
| Stage | 0.269 | |||
| I | 88 (16) | 52 (19) | 36 (13) | |
| II | 59 (11) | 30 (11) | 29 (11) | |
| III | 103 (19) | 47 (17) | 56 (21) | |
| IV | 290 (54) | 141 (52) | 149 (55) | |
| Smoking, n (%) | 0.605 | |||
| No | 261 (48) | 127 (47) | 134 (50) | |
| Yes | 279 (52) | 143 (53) | 136 (50) | |
| KPS, Median (Q1,Q3) | 90 (80, 90) | 90 (80, 90) | 90 (80, 90) | 0.133 |
| D-dimer, Median (Q1,Q3) (U/L) | 6.53 (3.94, 8.48) | 3.93 (2.85, 5.42) | 8.49 (7.4, 10.34) | <0.001 |
|
| ||||
| Hypertension, n (%) | 0.037 | |||
| No | 366 (62) | 49 (53) | 47 (76) | |
| Yes | 224 (38) | 44 (47) | 15 (24) | |
| Diabetes, n (%) | 0.323 | |||
| No | 533 (90) | 82 (88) | 57 (92) | |
| Yes | 57 (10) | 11 (12) | 5 (8) | |
| Hyperlipidemia, n (%) | 0.024 | |||
| No | 538 (91) | 88 (95) | 57 (92) | |
| Yes | 52 (9) | 5 (5) | 5 (8) | |
| Heart.failure, n (%) | 0.111 | |||
| No | 579 (98) | 89 (96) | 61 (98) | |
| Yes | 11 (2) | 4 (4) | 1 (2) | |
| ACS, n (%) | 0.813 | |||
| No | 575 (97) | 90 (97) | 60 (97) | |
| Yes | 15 (3) | 3 (3) | 2 (3) | |
|
| ||||
| Status, n (%) | <0.001 | |||
| alive | 174 (29) | 43 (46) | 23 (37) | |
| dead | 416 (71) | 50 (54) | 39 (63) | |
| Overall survival time, Median (Q1,Q3) | 24.17 (9.9, 50.99) | 38.9 (12.87, 59.8) | 18.05 (7.53, 50.99) | 0.012 |
| VTE events | <0.001 | |||
| 494 (91) | 260 (96) | 234 (87) | ||
| 46 (9) | 10 (4) | 36 (13) | ||
IQR, interquartile range; BMI, Body Mass Index; KPS, Karnofsky Performance Status; AQI, air quality index; ACS, Acute Coronary Syndromes; VTE, venous thromboembolism.
Figure 4Kaplan-Meier curves for NSCLC patients with different factors. (A) Kaplan-Meier curves for OS in patients in the VTE and non-VTE groups. (B) Kaplan-Meier curves for OS in different D-dimer levels.
Univariate regression analysis on NSCLC patients for different endpoints.
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| VTE events, yes vs. no | 1.72 [1.25, 2.36] | 0.001 | - | - |
| Age (year), >65 vs. ≤ 65 | 1.39 [1.13, 1.70] | 0.002 | 0.79 [0.42, 1.47] | 0.466 |
| Gender, male vs. female | 1.45 [1.15, 1.82] | 0.001 | 1.27 [0.66, 2.62] | 0.492 |
| Pathological type, adenocarcinoma vs. others | 0.80 [0.65, 0.99] | 0.036 | 1.06 [0.57, 2.03] | 0.866 |
| Stage III or IV, yes vs. no | 1.32 [1.04, 1.68] | 0.024 | 2.66 [1.19, 7.12] | 0.029 |
| Smoking, yes vs. no | 1.23 [1.00, 1.51] | 0.045 | 1.24 [0.68, 2.30] | 0.491 |
| KPS score, <90, vs. >90 | 2.34 [1.91, 2.88] | <0.001 | 1.45 [0.79, 2.67] | 0.228 |
| D-dimer, >6.53 vs. ≤ 6.53 | 1.51 [1.23, 1.85] | <0.001 | 4.00 [2.01, 8.68] | <0.001 |
| Hypertension, yes vs. no | 1.04 [0.84, 1.27] | 0.743 | 1.17 [0.62, 2.14] | 0.626 |
| Diabetes, yes vs. no | 1.10 [0.78, 1.54] | 0.591 | - | - |
| Hyperlipidemia, yes vs. no | 0.66 [0.45, 0.98] | 0.037 | 1.08 [0.31, 2.85] | 0.887 |
| Heart failure, yes vs. no | 1.25 [0.59, 2.63] | 0.563 | 1.20 [0.06, 6.59] | 0.866 |
| ACS, yes vs. no | 1.45 [0.77, 2.72] | 0.245 | 3.06 [0.67, 10.26] | 0.095 |
| BMI, >24 vs. ≤ 24 | 0.94 [0.75, 1.17] | 0.554 | 0.81 [0.39, 1.57] | 0.545 |
IQR, interquartile range; BMI, Body Mass Index; KPS, Karnofsky Performance Status; AQI, air quality index; ACS, Acute Coronary Syndromes.
Figure 5Forest plot for multifactorial analysis of different endpoints in patients with NSCLC. (A) Forest plot for multifactor analysis of the risk of overall mortality. (B) Forest plot for multifactor analysis of the risk of VTE events.