Limits...
Prognostic significance of p53 expression in patients with esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis.

Wang L, Yu X, Li J, Zhang Z, Hou J, Li F - BMC Cancer (2016)

Bottom Line: Subgroup analyses according to histological type, continent of the patients, and cut-off value revealed the similar results.The results also indicated that p53 expression was highly associated with advanced TNM stages (I/II vs.However, p53 expression in the included studies was not significantly associated with tumor size (≤ 5 cm vs. > 5 cm, OR = 1.13, 95 % CI: 0.92-1.40, P = 0.24), tumor location (upper + middle vs. lower, OR = 0.91, 95 % CI: 0.70-1.17, P = 0.45), grade of differentiation (well + moderate vs. poor, OR = 1.10, 95 % CI: 0.90-1.34, P = 0.35), and the depth of invasion (T1/T2 vs.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Pathology and Key Laboratories for Xinjiang Endemic and Ethnic Diseases, Shihezi University School of Medicine, Shihezi, Xinjiang, China.

ABSTRACT

Background: The prognostic value of p53 protein expression in esophageal cancer has been evaluated, but the results remain inconclusive and no consensus has yet been achieved. This meta-analysis was conducted to quantitatively assess the prognostic significance of p53 expression in esophageal cancer.

Methods: Publications that assessed the clinical or prognostic significance of p53 expression in esophageal cancer and were published before July 1, 2015 were identified by searching the PubMed and EMBASE databases. A meta-analysis was performed to clarify the association between p53 expression and the clinical outcomes.

Results: A total of 36 publications met the criteria and included 4577 cases. Analysis of these data showed that p53 expression in esophageal cancer was significantly associated with poorer 5-year survival (RR = 1.30, 95 % CI: 1.11-1.51, P = 0.0008). Subgroup analyses according to histological type, continent of the patients, and cut-off value revealed the similar results. The results also indicated that p53 expression was highly associated with advanced TNM stages (I/II vs. III/IV, OR = 0.74, 95 % CI: 0.55-0.99, P = 0.04), lymph node metastasis (OR = 0.77, 95 % CI: 0.66-0.90, P = 0.001), and distant metastasis (OR = 0.46, 95 % CI: 0.26-0.80, P = 0.006). However, p53 expression in the included studies was not significantly associated with tumor size (≤ 5 cm vs. > 5 cm, OR = 1.13, 95 % CI: 0.92-1.40, P = 0.24), tumor location (upper + middle vs. lower, OR = 0.91, 95 % CI: 0.70-1.17, P = 0.45), grade of differentiation (well + moderate vs. poor, OR = 1.10, 95 % CI: 0.90-1.34, P = 0.35), and the depth of invasion (T1/T2 vs. T3/T4, OR = 0.86, 95 % CI: 0.71-1.03, P = 0.09).

Conclusions: This meta-analysis showed that p53 expression may be a useful biomarker for predicting poorer prognosis in patients with esophageal cancer.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Forest plot of p53 expression and OR for clinicopathological features. The investigated clinicopathological parameters are TNM stage (a), lymph node metastasis (b), and distant metastasis (c). ORs with the corresponding confidence intervals are shown
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4930564&req=5

Fig2: Forest plot of p53 expression and OR for clinicopathological features. The investigated clinicopathological parameters are TNM stage (a), lymph node metastasis (b), and distant metastasis (c). ORs with the corresponding confidence intervals are shown

Mentions: The association between p53 and several clinicopathological parameters are illustrated in Fig. 2 and Table 2. The p53 expression was highly correlated with more advanced TNM stages (I/II vs. III/IV, OR = 0.74, 95 % CI: 0.55–0.99, P = 0.04, Fig. 2a), lymph node metastasis (OR = 0.77, 95 % CI: 0.66–0.90, P = 0.001, Fig. 2b), and distant metastasis (OR = 0.46, 95 % CI: 0.26–0.80, P = 0.006, Fig. 2c). However, p53 expression was not significantly associated with tumor size (≤ 5 cm vs. > 5 cm, OR = 1.13, 95 % CI: 0.92–1.40, P = 0.24), tumor location (upper + middle vs. lower, OR = 0.91, 95 % CI: 0.70–1.17, P = 0.45), grade of differentiation (well + moderate vs. poor, OR = 1.10, 95 % CI: 0.90–1.34, P = 0.35), and depth of invasion (T1/T2 vs. T3/T4, OR = 0.86, 95 % CI: 0.71–1.03, P = 0.09; Table 2).Fig. 2


Prognostic significance of p53 expression in patients with esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis.

Wang L, Yu X, Li J, Zhang Z, Hou J, Li F - BMC Cancer (2016)

Forest plot of p53 expression and OR for clinicopathological features. The investigated clinicopathological parameters are TNM stage (a), lymph node metastasis (b), and distant metastasis (c). ORs with the corresponding confidence intervals are shown
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4930564&req=5

Fig2: Forest plot of p53 expression and OR for clinicopathological features. The investigated clinicopathological parameters are TNM stage (a), lymph node metastasis (b), and distant metastasis (c). ORs with the corresponding confidence intervals are shown
Mentions: The association between p53 and several clinicopathological parameters are illustrated in Fig. 2 and Table 2. The p53 expression was highly correlated with more advanced TNM stages (I/II vs. III/IV, OR = 0.74, 95 % CI: 0.55–0.99, P = 0.04, Fig. 2a), lymph node metastasis (OR = 0.77, 95 % CI: 0.66–0.90, P = 0.001, Fig. 2b), and distant metastasis (OR = 0.46, 95 % CI: 0.26–0.80, P = 0.006, Fig. 2c). However, p53 expression was not significantly associated with tumor size (≤ 5 cm vs. > 5 cm, OR = 1.13, 95 % CI: 0.92–1.40, P = 0.24), tumor location (upper + middle vs. lower, OR = 0.91, 95 % CI: 0.70–1.17, P = 0.45), grade of differentiation (well + moderate vs. poor, OR = 1.10, 95 % CI: 0.90–1.34, P = 0.35), and depth of invasion (T1/T2 vs. T3/T4, OR = 0.86, 95 % CI: 0.71–1.03, P = 0.09; Table 2).Fig. 2

Bottom Line: Subgroup analyses according to histological type, continent of the patients, and cut-off value revealed the similar results.The results also indicated that p53 expression was highly associated with advanced TNM stages (I/II vs.However, p53 expression in the included studies was not significantly associated with tumor size (≤ 5 cm vs. > 5 cm, OR = 1.13, 95 % CI: 0.92-1.40, P = 0.24), tumor location (upper + middle vs. lower, OR = 0.91, 95 % CI: 0.70-1.17, P = 0.45), grade of differentiation (well + moderate vs. poor, OR = 1.10, 95 % CI: 0.90-1.34, P = 0.35), and the depth of invasion (T1/T2 vs.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Pathology and Key Laboratories for Xinjiang Endemic and Ethnic Diseases, Shihezi University School of Medicine, Shihezi, Xinjiang, China.

ABSTRACT

Background: The prognostic value of p53 protein expression in esophageal cancer has been evaluated, but the results remain inconclusive and no consensus has yet been achieved. This meta-analysis was conducted to quantitatively assess the prognostic significance of p53 expression in esophageal cancer.

Methods: Publications that assessed the clinical or prognostic significance of p53 expression in esophageal cancer and were published before July 1, 2015 were identified by searching the PubMed and EMBASE databases. A meta-analysis was performed to clarify the association between p53 expression and the clinical outcomes.

Results: A total of 36 publications met the criteria and included 4577 cases. Analysis of these data showed that p53 expression in esophageal cancer was significantly associated with poorer 5-year survival (RR = 1.30, 95 % CI: 1.11-1.51, P = 0.0008). Subgroup analyses according to histological type, continent of the patients, and cut-off value revealed the similar results. The results also indicated that p53 expression was highly associated with advanced TNM stages (I/II vs. III/IV, OR = 0.74, 95 % CI: 0.55-0.99, P = 0.04), lymph node metastasis (OR = 0.77, 95 % CI: 0.66-0.90, P = 0.001), and distant metastasis (OR = 0.46, 95 % CI: 0.26-0.80, P = 0.006). However, p53 expression in the included studies was not significantly associated with tumor size (≤ 5 cm vs. > 5 cm, OR = 1.13, 95 % CI: 0.92-1.40, P = 0.24), tumor location (upper + middle vs. lower, OR = 0.91, 95 % CI: 0.70-1.17, P = 0.45), grade of differentiation (well + moderate vs. poor, OR = 1.10, 95 % CI: 0.90-1.34, P = 0.35), and the depth of invasion (T1/T2 vs. T3/T4, OR = 0.86, 95 % CI: 0.71-1.03, P = 0.09).

Conclusions: This meta-analysis showed that p53 expression may be a useful biomarker for predicting poorer prognosis in patients with esophageal cancer.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus