Evidence Hub

Long non coding RNA XIST as a prognostic cancer marker - A meta-analysis

Qun Zhou, Wei Hu, Wei Zhu, Feng Zhang, Lin-lin Li, Cong Liu, Y. Songyang, Chengcao Sun et al.

Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry, 2018

858 participants · 33 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The X inactivate-specific transcript (XIST), derived from XIST gene, is aberrantly expressed in various cancers. High-expression of XIST is related to poor clinical outcome. This meta-analysis evaluated the potential role of XIST as novel predictor of prognosis in human cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This meta-analysis collected eligible studies about XIST and tumor prognosis through retrieving keywords in Web of Science, PubMed, Embase and the CNKI database, from 1993 to August 21, 2017. The quantitative meta-analysis was carried out with Stata SE12.0 and RevMan3.23 software. The aim was to determine whether XIST expression is associated with cancer prognosis and clinicopathology.

RESULTS

A total of 858 patients from 10 eligible studies were included in the final meta-analysis. Overall, a significant negative association between XIST and overall survival (OS) time (HR = 2.62, 95% CI: 2.18-3.14) was observed. Statistical significance was also showed in subgroup meta-analysis stratified by the country, sample size, follow-up and publication year. It was reported that increased XIST was positively related to advanced clinical TNM stage (OR = 4.03, 95% CI: 2.22-7.30), lymph node metastasis (LNM) (OR = 2.70, 95% CI: 1.73-4.21), distant metastasis (DM) (OR = 2.61, 95% CI: 1.57-4.33) and tumor size (OR = 3.10, 95% CI: 2.24-4.30).

CONCLUSIONS

LncRNA XIST may serve as a potential biomarker to predict solid tumor prognosis. This molecule can be effectively used to predict…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 858 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free