Cargando…
Prognostic Value and Clinicopathological Differences of HIFs in Colorectal Cancer: Evidence from Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of HIFs in colorectal cancer was evaluated in a large number of studies, but the conclusions were inconclusive. Meanwhile, clinicopathologic differences of HIF-1α and HIF-2α were rarely compared in recent studies. METHODOLOGY: Identical search strategies were used to...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3855620/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24324596 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0080337 |
_version_ | 1782294947602366464 |
---|---|
author | Chen, Zhigang He, Xin Xia, Wenjie Huang, Qi Zhang, Zhigang Ye, Jun Ni, Chao Wu, Pin Wu, Dang Xu, Jinghong Qiu, Fuming Huang, Jian |
author_facet | Chen, Zhigang He, Xin Xia, Wenjie Huang, Qi Zhang, Zhigang Ye, Jun Ni, Chao Wu, Pin Wu, Dang Xu, Jinghong Qiu, Fuming Huang, Jian |
author_sort | Chen, Zhigang |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of HIFs in colorectal cancer was evaluated in a large number of studies, but the conclusions were inconclusive. Meanwhile, clinicopathologic differences of HIF-1α and HIF-2α were rarely compared in recent studies. METHODOLOGY: Identical search strategies were used to search relevant literatures in the PubMed and Web of Science databases. The prognostic significances and clinicopathological differences of HIFs in CRC were analyzed. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A total of 23studies comprising 2984 CRC patients met the inclusion criteria. The results indicated that overexpressed HIFs were significantly associated with increase of mortality risk, including overall survival (OS) (HR 2.06 95%CI 1.55–2.74) and disease free survival (HR 2.84, 95%CI 1.87–4.31). Subgroup analysis revealed that both overexpressed HIF-1α and HIF-2α had correlations with worse prognosis. The pooled HRs were 2.01 (95% CI: 1.55–2.6) and 2.07(95% CI: 1.01–4.26). Further subgroup analysis on HIF-1α was performed by study location, number of patients, quality score and cut-off value. The results showed that HIF-1α overexpression was significantly associated with poor OS, particularly in Asian countries (HR 2.3, 95% CI: 1.74–3.01), while not in European or other countries. In addition, overexpression of HIF-1α was closely related with these clinicopathological features, including Dukes' stages (OR 0.39, 95% CI: 0.17–0.89), UICC stages (OR 0.42 95% CI: 0.3–0.59), depth of invasion (OR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.51–0.99), lymphnode status (OR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.32–0.73) and metastasis (OR 0.29, 95% CI: 0.11–0.81). While overexpression of HIF-2α was only associated with grade of differentiation (OR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.29–0.81). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that both HIF-1α and HIF-2α overexpression were associated with an unfavorable prognosis. HIF-1α overexpression seemed to be associated with worse prognosis in Asian countries. Additionally, HIF-1α and HIF-2α indicated distinct clinicopathologic features. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3855620 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-38556202013-12-09 Prognostic Value and Clinicopathological Differences of HIFs in Colorectal Cancer: Evidence from Meta-Analysis Chen, Zhigang He, Xin Xia, Wenjie Huang, Qi Zhang, Zhigang Ye, Jun Ni, Chao Wu, Pin Wu, Dang Xu, Jinghong Qiu, Fuming Huang, Jian PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of HIFs in colorectal cancer was evaluated in a large number of studies, but the conclusions were inconclusive. Meanwhile, clinicopathologic differences of HIF-1α and HIF-2α were rarely compared in recent studies. METHODOLOGY: Identical search strategies were used to search relevant literatures in the PubMed and Web of Science databases. The prognostic significances and clinicopathological differences of HIFs in CRC were analyzed. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A total of 23studies comprising 2984 CRC patients met the inclusion criteria. The results indicated that overexpressed HIFs were significantly associated with increase of mortality risk, including overall survival (OS) (HR 2.06 95%CI 1.55–2.74) and disease free survival (HR 2.84, 95%CI 1.87–4.31). Subgroup analysis revealed that both overexpressed HIF-1α and HIF-2α had correlations with worse prognosis. The pooled HRs were 2.01 (95% CI: 1.55–2.6) and 2.07(95% CI: 1.01–4.26). Further subgroup analysis on HIF-1α was performed by study location, number of patients, quality score and cut-off value. The results showed that HIF-1α overexpression was significantly associated with poor OS, particularly in Asian countries (HR 2.3, 95% CI: 1.74–3.01), while not in European or other countries. In addition, overexpression of HIF-1α was closely related with these clinicopathological features, including Dukes' stages (OR 0.39, 95% CI: 0.17–0.89), UICC stages (OR 0.42 95% CI: 0.3–0.59), depth of invasion (OR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.51–0.99), lymphnode status (OR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.32–0.73) and metastasis (OR 0.29, 95% CI: 0.11–0.81). While overexpression of HIF-2α was only associated with grade of differentiation (OR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.29–0.81). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that both HIF-1α and HIF-2α overexpression were associated with an unfavorable prognosis. HIF-1α overexpression seemed to be associated with worse prognosis in Asian countries. Additionally, HIF-1α and HIF-2α indicated distinct clinicopathologic features. Public Library of Science 2013-12-06 /pmc/articles/PMC3855620/ /pubmed/24324596 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0080337 Text en © 2013 Chen et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Chen, Zhigang He, Xin Xia, Wenjie Huang, Qi Zhang, Zhigang Ye, Jun Ni, Chao Wu, Pin Wu, Dang Xu, Jinghong Qiu, Fuming Huang, Jian Prognostic Value and Clinicopathological Differences of HIFs in Colorectal Cancer: Evidence from Meta-Analysis |
title | Prognostic Value and Clinicopathological Differences of HIFs in Colorectal Cancer: Evidence from Meta-Analysis |
title_full | Prognostic Value and Clinicopathological Differences of HIFs in Colorectal Cancer: Evidence from Meta-Analysis |
title_fullStr | Prognostic Value and Clinicopathological Differences of HIFs in Colorectal Cancer: Evidence from Meta-Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Prognostic Value and Clinicopathological Differences of HIFs in Colorectal Cancer: Evidence from Meta-Analysis |
title_short | Prognostic Value and Clinicopathological Differences of HIFs in Colorectal Cancer: Evidence from Meta-Analysis |
title_sort | prognostic value and clinicopathological differences of hifs in colorectal cancer: evidence from meta-analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3855620/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24324596 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0080337 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chenzhigang prognosticvalueandclinicopathologicaldifferencesofhifsincolorectalcancerevidencefrommetaanalysis AT hexin prognosticvalueandclinicopathologicaldifferencesofhifsincolorectalcancerevidencefrommetaanalysis AT xiawenjie prognosticvalueandclinicopathologicaldifferencesofhifsincolorectalcancerevidencefrommetaanalysis AT huangqi prognosticvalueandclinicopathologicaldifferencesofhifsincolorectalcancerevidencefrommetaanalysis AT zhangzhigang prognosticvalueandclinicopathologicaldifferencesofhifsincolorectalcancerevidencefrommetaanalysis AT yejun prognosticvalueandclinicopathologicaldifferencesofhifsincolorectalcancerevidencefrommetaanalysis AT nichao prognosticvalueandclinicopathologicaldifferencesofhifsincolorectalcancerevidencefrommetaanalysis AT wupin prognosticvalueandclinicopathologicaldifferencesofhifsincolorectalcancerevidencefrommetaanalysis AT wudang prognosticvalueandclinicopathologicaldifferencesofhifsincolorectalcancerevidencefrommetaanalysis AT xujinghong prognosticvalueandclinicopathologicaldifferencesofhifsincolorectalcancerevidencefrommetaanalysis AT qiufuming prognosticvalueandclinicopathologicaldifferencesofhifsincolorectalcancerevidencefrommetaanalysis AT huangjian prognosticvalueandclinicopathologicaldifferencesofhifsincolorectalcancerevidencefrommetaanalysis |