4.4 Review

Long non-coding RNA XIST predicting advanced clinical parameters in cancer: A Meta-Analysis and case series study in a single institution

期刊

ONCOLOGY LETTERS
卷 18, 期 3, 页码 2192-2202

出版社

SPANDIDOS PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.3892/ol.2019.10592

关键词

long non-coding RNA; X-inactive specific transcript; meta-analysis; cancer; clinical outcome

类别

资金

  1. Chongqing Science and Technology Commission [cstc2015jcyjA10046]
  2. Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital of Chongqing Medical University Research Projects [1712]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dysregulated expression of long non-coding RNA X-inactive specific transcript (lncRNA-XIST) has been indicated in various cancer types. In the present study, a meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the potential role of lncRNA-XIST in predicting the clinicopathological parameters of patients with cancer. Eligible studies were obtained through a systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Library, of articles published prior to January 2019. The combined odds ratio and 95% confidence interval were calculated to determine the association between lncRNA-XIST expression and patient outcome. In addition, 45 pairs of osteosarcoma (OS) tissues and adjacent healthy tissues from a single institution were analyzed for the expression of lncRNA-XIST, and its association with clinicopathological features; ultimately, a total of 1,869 cancer patients from 25 studies were assessed. The results demonstrated that high expression levels of lncRNA-XIST were significantly associated with lymphatic metastasis, larger tumor size, advanced cancer stage and distant metastasis. However, sex was not associated with lncRNA-XIST expression level. In the OS patient cohort, it was demonstrated that lncRNA-XIST was highly expressed in OS tissues, which negatively correlated with patient prognosis. The present study indicated that lncRNA-XIST may serve as a potential biomarker for advanced clinical parameters in human cancer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据