| Title |
Prognostic value and clinical significance of long noncoding RNA CASC2 in human malignancies: a meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Management and Research, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cmar.s161373 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Juan Cai, Xueliang Zuo, Zhiqiang Chen, Wenying Zhao, Yiping Zhu, Zhengxiang Zhang, Xiaobing Ye |
| Abstract |
This meta-analysis aimed to assess the prognostic value of long noncoding RNA cancer susceptibility candidate 2 (CASC2) in human tumors. We searched the available databases up to December 2017. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to examine the prognostic impact of CASC2 on overall survival (OS) in patients diagnosed with malignancies. A total of eight studies with 663 cancer patients were enrolled. Our results showed that high CASC2 expression level was associated with a favorable OS (HR=0.437, 95% CI: 0.345-0.554). The significant results were not altered by stratified analysis according to cancer type, sample size, follow-up months, and HR estimation method. A significant association of glioma tumor stage with CASC2 expression was detected (III-IV vs I-II: odds ratio=2.126, 95% CI: 1.032-4.378). CASC2 could be used as an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR=0.450, 95% CI: 0.336-0.602). Sensitivity analysis showed that no single study changed the pooled results significantly. Begg's funnel plot and Egger's test showed that no publication bias was detected. High expression level of CASC2 is associated with favorable survival outcome for cancer patients, and CASC2 could be used as a prognostic predictor for cancers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 6 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 17% |
| Researcher | 1 | 17% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 17% |
| Other | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 33% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 June 2018.
All research outputs
#18,639,173
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Management and Research
#1,056
of 2,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,017
of 326,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Management and Research
#33
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,017 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,259 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.