| Title |
Prognostic value of Bcl-2 expression in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis and systemic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
OncoTargets and therapy, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ott.s89275 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jie Zhang, Shengfei Wang, Lei Wang, Rui Wang, Sufeng Chen, Bin Pan, Yihua Sun, Haiquan Chen |
| Abstract |
B-cell-lymphoma-2 (Bcl-2) is a proto-oncogene that plays an important role in the regulation of apoptosis and cell survival. However, there are much conflicting data in the literature concerning the association between Bcl-2 and prognosis in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). There is little in the way of meta-analysis focused on Bcl-2 and its effect on NSCLC prognosis. This study was performed to provide an assessment of whether expression levels of Bcl-2 are associated with prognosis in patients with NSCLC. We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure for all eligible studies. The combined hazard ratios (HRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in terms of overall survival were evaluated. Fifty published studies including 6,863 patients with lung cancer were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, Bcl-2 was expressed in 33% of the NSCLC tumors studied. Our analysis indicates that NSCLC patients with Bcl-2-positive expression have a better prognosis than those with Bcl-2-negative expression in both Asian and non-Asian study populations (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.72-0.87, P<0.00001). However, Bcl-2-positive expression seems to have no significant impact on survival of stage I NSCLC patients. Our results indicated that Bcl-2 might be a useful prognostic marker for NSCLC generally. Larger clinical trials are needed to confirm the prognostic value of Bcl-2 in stage I NSCLC. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Researcher | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 8 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 15% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 9 | 35% |
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 28 November 2015.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#1,597
of 3,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,832
of 294,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#53
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,016 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 294,812 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.