首页 » 文章 » 文章详细信息
BioMed Research International Volume 2018 ,2018-12-03
The Prognostic Value of Nanog Overexpression in Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis
Review Article
Wei Cheng 1 Hongzhi Wang 2 Juanjuan Yuan 3 Ziwei Cheng 1 Dongwei Xing 1 Minguang Zhang 1
Show affiliations
DOI:10.1155/2018/3429261
Received 2018-07-01, accepted for publication 2018-10-22, Published 2018-10-22
PDF
摘要

Background. Recent several studies have showed that the nanog overexpression leads to poor prognosis in some kinds of cancer including hepatocellular carcinoma and gastrointestinal luminal cancer. However, the correlations between prognosis and clinic-pathological features and nanog overexpression in lung cancer are still not well-known. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the role of nanog in lung cancer. Methods. An electronic retrieval for related studies was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EMBASE databases, Chinese CNKI, and the Chinese Wan Fang database up to May 2018. The relationships between nanog overexpression and overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) as well as clinic-pathological features in lung cancer were investigated. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by STATA12. Results. 11 studies containing 1422 patients were identified in our meta-analysis. The overexpression of nanog showed decreased OS (HR = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.49-2.25, P ≤ 0.001) and DFS (HR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.2-2.9, P = 0.006). Moreover, overexpression of nanog was significantly related to differentiation (OR = 4.17, 95% CI = 2.17-6.43, P ≤ 0.001), lymph node metastasis (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.06-2.91, P = 0.028) and tumor size (OR = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.17-3.20, P = 0.010), and no correlation with T stage, TNM, stage, and gender. Conclusions. Our results suggested that nanog overexpression, a hazard factor of differentiation, lymph node metastasis, and tumor size, may predicate decreased OS and DFS for lung cancer.

授权许可

Copyright © 2018 Wei Cheng et al. 2018
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

图表

Flow diagram of the study selection in this meta-analysis.

Pooled analysis for the association between nanog overexpression and OS. (a) Forest plots. (b) Funnel plots. (c) Sensitive analysis. OS, overall survival. HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence intervals; se, standard error.

Pooled analysis for the association between nanog overexpression and OS. (a) Forest plots. (b) Funnel plots. (c) Sensitive analysis. OS, overall survival. HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence intervals; se, standard error.

Pooled analysis for the association between nanog overexpression and OS. (a) Forest plots. (b) Funnel plots. (c) Sensitive analysis. OS, overall survival. HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence intervals; se, standard error.

Pooled analysis for the association between nanog overexpression and DFS. (a) Forest plots. (b) Funnel plots. (c) Sensitive analysis. DFS, disease-free survival; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence intervals; se, standard error.

Pooled analysis for the association between nanog overexpression and DFS. (a) Forest plots. (b) Funnel plots. (c) Sensitive analysis. DFS, disease-free survival; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence intervals; se, standard error.

Pooled analysis for the association between nanog overexpression and DFS. (a) Forest plots. (b) Funnel plots. (c) Sensitive analysis. DFS, disease-free survival; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence intervals; se, standard error.

Pooled analysis for the association between nanog overexpression and clinic-pathological features. (a) Differentiation. (b) Lymph node metastasis. (c) Tumor size. (d) T stage. (e) TNM stage. (f) Gender. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Pooled analysis for the association between nanog overexpression and clinic-pathological features. (a) Differentiation. (b) Lymph node metastasis. (c) Tumor size. (d) T stage. (e) TNM stage. (f) Gender. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Pooled analysis for the association between nanog overexpression and clinic-pathological features. (a) Differentiation. (b) Lymph node metastasis. (c) Tumor size. (d) T stage. (e) TNM stage. (f) Gender. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Pooled analysis for the association between nanog overexpression and clinic-pathological features. (a) Differentiation. (b) Lymph node metastasis. (c) Tumor size. (d) T stage. (e) TNM stage. (f) Gender. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Pooled analysis for the association between nanog overexpression and clinic-pathological features. (a) Differentiation. (b) Lymph node metastasis. (c) Tumor size. (d) T stage. (e) TNM stage. (f) Gender. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Pooled analysis for the association between nanog overexpression and clinic-pathological features. (a) Differentiation. (b) Lymph node metastasis. (c) Tumor size. (d) T stage. (e) TNM stage. (f) Gender. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

通讯作者

1. Dongwei Xing.Shanghai Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 200071, China, shutcm.edu.cn.xdw021@163.com
2. Minguang Zhang.Shanghai Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 200071, China, shutcm.edu.cn.mgzhang09@163.com

推荐引用方式

Wei Cheng,Hongzhi Wang,Juanjuan Yuan,Ziwei Cheng,Dongwei Xing,Minguang Zhang. The Prognostic Value of Nanog Overexpression in Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. BioMed Research International ,Vol.2018(2018)

您觉得这篇文章对您有帮助吗?
分享和收藏
0

是否收藏?

参考文献
[1] R. L. Siegel, K. D. Miller, A. Jemal. (2017). Cancer Statistics, 2017. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians.67(1):7-30. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[2] S. Duval, R. Tweedie. (2000). Trim and fill: a simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics.56(2):455-463. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[3] C. B. Begg, M. Mazumdar. (1994). Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics.50(4):1088-1101. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[4] T. Reya, S. J. Morrison, M. F. Clarke, I. L. Weissman. et al.(2001). Stem cells, cancer, and cancer stem cells. Nature.414(6859):105-111. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[5] Y. Yang, C.-S. Niu, C.-D. Cheng. (2013). Pin1-Nanog expression in human glioma is correlated with advanced tumor progression. Oncology Reports.30(2):560-566. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[6] L. A. Torre, F. Bray, R. L. Siegel, J. Ferlay. et al.(2015). Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians.65(2):87-108. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[7] R. Gangemi, L. Paleari, A. M. Orengo, A. Cesario. et al.(2009). Cancer stem cells: A new paradigm for understanding tumor growth and progression and drug resistance. Current Medicinal Chemistry.16(14):1688-1703. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[8] S. Kregel, R. Z. Szmulewitz, D. J. V. Griend. (2014). The pluripotency factor Nanog is directly upregulated by the androgen receptor in prostate cancer cells. The Prostate.74:1530-1543. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[9] A. Aggarwal, G. Lewison, S. Idir, M. Peters. et al.(2016). The state of lung cancer research: A global analysis. Journal of Thoracic Oncology.11(7):1040-1050. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[10] J. F. Tierney, L. A. Stewart, D. Ghersi, S. Burdett. et al.(2007). Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysis. Trials.8, article 16. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[11] N. Gawlik-Rzemieniewska, A. Galilejczyk, M. Krawczyk, I. Bednarek. et al.(2016). Silencing expression of the NANOG gene and changes in migration and metastasis of urinary bladder cancer cells. Archives of Medical Science.12(4):889-897. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[12] M. Q. Luo, Q. Pu, Y. L. Cao. (2013). Relationship between effect of GP regimen prognostic significance and Nanog expression in advanced lung cancer. Cancer research and clinic.25(9):609-611. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[13] B. W. Mo, L. D. Li, C. M. Wang. (2014). Expressions and clinical significance of Nanog and CD44 protein in lung cancer. The journal of practical medicine.30(4):560-562. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[14] G. A. Wells, B. Shea, D. O'Connell. (2000). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analysis. Applied Engineering in Agriculture.18(6):727-734. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[15] C. Liang, T. Zhao, H. Ge. (2018). The clinic-pathological and prognostic value of Nanog in human gastrointestinal luminal cancer: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Surgery.53:193-200. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[16] M. Q. Luo, Q. Bo, Y. L. Cao. (2013). Expression of Nanog in non-small cell lung cancer tissue. Journal of zhengzhou university (Medical Sciences).48(6):758-761. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[17] B. Chang, M. J. Park, S. I. Choi, K. H. In. et al.(2017). NANOG as an adverse predictive marker in advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. OncoTargets and Therapy.10:4625-4633. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[18] E. Sodja, M. Rijavec, A. Koren, A. Sadikov. et al.(2016). The prognostic value of whole blood SOX2, NANOG and OCT4 mRNA expression in advanced small-cell lung cancer. Radiology and Oncology.50(2):188-196. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[19] T. Wang, S. Shigdar, M. P. Gantier, Y. Hou. et al.(2015). Cancer stem cell targeted therapy: Progress amid controversies. Oncotarget.6(42):44191-44206. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[20] National Comprehensive Cancer Network. . DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[21] National Comprehensive Cancer Network. . DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[22] J. L. Liu, W. Gao, Q. M. Kang, X. J. Zhang. et al.(2013). Prognostic Value of Survivin in Patients with Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. PLoS ONE.8(8):e71930. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[23] X.-Q. Li, X.-L. Yang, G. Zhang, S.-P. Wu. et al.(2013). Nuclear -catenin accumulation is associated with increased expression of Nanog protein and predicts poor prognosis of non-small cell lung cancer. Journal of Translational Medicine.11(1, article no. 114). DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[24] K. Han, W. Qi, Z. Gan, Z. Shen. et al.(2013). Prognostic Value of Ezrin in Solid Tumors: A Meta-Analysis of the Literature. PLoS ONE.8(7):e68527. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[25] J.-Y. Zhu, X. Yang, Y. Chen, Y. Jiang. et al.(2017). Curcumin Suppresses Lung Cancer Stem Cells via Inhibiting Wnt/-catenin and Sonic Hedgehog Pathways. Phytotherapy Research.31(4):680-688. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[26] M. Egger, G. D. Smith, M. Schneider. (1998). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Bmj British Medical Journal.316(7129):469-471. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[27] S. H. Lee, M. J. Park, S. Y. Park, K. H. In. et al.(2017). P2.03b-040 NANOG Predicts Poor Outcome in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated with Platinum-Based Chemotherapy. Journal of Thoracic Oncology.12(1):S959-S960. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[28] X. Zhang, Y. Lou, X. Zheng. (2015). Wnt blockers inhibit the proliferation of lung cancer stem cells. Drug Design Development & Therapy.9:2399-2407. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[29] C. Liang, K. Zhang, H. Ge, W. Li. et al.(2018). Prognostic and clinicopathological value of Nanog in hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis. Clinica Chimica Acta.477:24-31. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[30] B. J. P. Huntly, D. G. Gilliland. (2005). Cancer biology: Summing up cancer stem cells. Nature.435(7046):1169-1170. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[31] E. Park, S. Y. Park, P.-L. Sun, Y. Jin. et al.(2016). Prognostic significance of stem cell-related marker expression and its correlation with histologic subtypes in lung adenocarcinoma. Oncotarget.7(27):42502-42512. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[32] I. Chambers, D. Colby, M. Robertson, J. Nichols. et al.(2003). Functional expression cloning of Nanog, a pluripotency sustaining factor in embryonic stem cells. Cell.113(5):643-655. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[33] T. Nagata, Y. Shimada, S. Sekine, R. Hori. et al.(2014). Prognostic significance of NANOG and KLF4 for breast cancer. Breast Cancer.21(1):96-101. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[34] S.-H. Chiou, M.-L. Wang, Y.-T. Chou, C.-J. Chen. et al.(2010). Coexpression of Oct4 and Nanog enhances malignancy in lung adenocarcinoma by inducing cancer stem cell-like properties and epithelial-mesenchymal transdifferentiation. Cancer Research.70(24):10433-10444. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[35] Y. Du, C. Ma, Z. Wang, Z. Liu. et al.(2013). Nanog, a novel prognostic marker for lung cancer. Surgical Oncology.22(4):224-229. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
[36] S. M. Yao, H. Y. He, J. L. Chen. (2016). Correlations of Nanog Expression in Lung Adenocarcinoma Tissue with Chemotherapy Response and Prognosis. Journal Clinical Research.33:2364-2367. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387.
文献评价指标
浏览 158次
下载全文 37次
评分次数 0次
用户评分 0.0分
分享 0次