ObjectiveThere is a heated debate on whether the prognostic value of SPARC is favorable or unfavorable. Thus, we carried out a meta-analysis evaluating the relationship between SPARC expression and the prognosis of patients with pancreatic cancer.MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science for relevant articles. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95%CI of overall survival (OS) were calculated to evaluate the prognostic value of SPARC expression in patients with pancreatic cancer. We also performed subgroup analyses.ResultsWith 1623 patients pooled from 10 available studies, the incorporative HR showed an unfavorable prognosis of patients with pancreatic cancer in the multivariate analysis (HR = 1.55, 95%CI: 1.11–2.17, P = 0.01), but not in univariate analysis (HR = 1.41, 95%CI: 0.47–4.21, P = 0.54) and estimate (HR = 1.24, 95%CI: 0.72–2.13, P = 0.44). And this adverse impact could also be found in the subgroup analyses in multivariate analysis, especially in the stroma (HR = 1.53, 95%CI: 1.05–2.24, P = 0.03). However, the combined HR had the highly significant heterogeneity. No obvious publication bias was found.ConclusionsSPARC might be an unfavorable indicator in patients with pancreatic cancer, especially in the stroma. More and further researches should be conducted to reveal the prognostic value of SPARC.

In summary, Oct4 was related to tumor differentiation and later Dukes stage in colon cancer, and was correlated with invasion of lymphatic only in RCC. In addition, Oct4 was a potential prognostic indicator in RCC.

Background Without targets, triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) has the worst prognosis in all subtypes of breast cancer (BC). Recently, eukaryotic translation initiation factor 3 m (eIF3m) has been declared to be involved in the malignant progression of various neoplasms. The aim of this study is to explore biological functions of eIF3m in TNBC. Methods Multiple databases, including Oncomine, KM-plotter and so on, were performed to analyze prognosis and function of eIF3m in TNBC. After transfection of eIF3m-shRNA lentivirus, CCK-8, colony formation assay, cell cycle analysis, wound healing assay, transwell assays, mitochondrial membrane potential assay and cell apoptosis analysis were performed to explore the roles of eIF3m in TNBC cell bio-behaviors. In addition, western blotting was conducted to analyze the potential molecular mechanisms of eIF3m. Results In multiple databases, up-regulated eIF3m had lower overall survival, relapse-free survival and post progression survival in BC. EIF3m expression in TNBC was obviously higher than in non-TNBC or normal breast tissues. Its expression in TNBC was positively related to differentiation, lymph node invasion and distant metastasis. After knockdown of eIF3m, cell proliferation, migration, invasion and levels of mitochondrial membrane potential of MDA-MB-231 and MDA-MB-436 were all significantly suppressed, while apoptosis rates of them were obviously increased. In addition, eIF3m could regulate cell-cycle, epithelial–mesenchymal transition and apoptosis-related proteins. Combined with public databases and RT-qPCR, 14 genes were identified to be modulated by eIF3m in the development of TNBC. Conclusions eIF3m is an unfavorable indicator of TNBC, and plays a vital role in the process of TNBC tumorigenesis.

ObjectiveThere is a heated debate on whether the prognostic value of NME1 is favorable or unfavorable. Thus, we carried out a meta-analysis to evaluate the relationship between NME1 expression and the prognosis of patients with digestive system neoplasms.MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science for relevant articles. The pooled odd ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95%CI were calculated to evaluate the prognostic value of NME1 expression in patients with digestive system neoplasms, and the association between NME1 expression and clinicopathological factors. We also performed subgroup analyses to find out the source of heterogeneity.Results2904 patients were pooled from 28 available studies in total. Neither the incorporative OR combined by 17 studies with overall survival (OR = 0.65, 95%CI:0.41–1.03, P = 0.07) nor the pooled OR with disease-free survival (OR = 0.75, 95%CI:0.17–3.36, P = 0.71) in statistics showed any significance. Although we couldn’t find any significance in TNM stage (OR = 0.78, 95%CI:0.44–1.36, P = 0.38), elevated NME1 expression was related to well tumor differentiation (OR = 0.59, 95%CI:0.47–0.73, P<0.00001), negative N status (OR = 0.54, 95%CI:0.36–0.82, P = 0.003) and Dukes’ stage (OR = 0.43, 95%CI:0.24–0.77, P = 0.004). And in the subgroup analyses, we only find the “years” which might be the source of heterogeneity of overall survival in gastric cancer.ConclusionsThe results showed that statistically significant association was found between NME1 expression and the tumor differentiation, N status and Dukes’ stage of patients with digestive system cancers, while no significance was found in overall survival, disease-free survival and TNM stage. More and further researches should be conducted to reveal the prognostic value of NME1.

Purpose Triple-negative breast carcinoma (TNBC) is accompanied with high risk of metastasis and recurrence. The present study aimed to explore the clinicopathological and prognostic roles of putative tumor-related genes in patients with TNBC. Methods Thirty pairs of frozen-thawed tumors were used to select reliable indicators via real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). Then, 150 pathology specimens were used to evaluate the expression of proteins in TNBC through immunohistochemistry. In addition, Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analysis were also performed to analyze the overall survival and disease-free survival. Results RT-qPCR results indicated that among all the proteins analyzed using fresh-frozen TNBC samples, the expression levels of only Survivin and zinc finger of the cerebellum 1 (ZIC1) were obviously different from those in the corresponding normal tissues. Survivin and ZIC1 expression had opposite effects on the clinicopathological diagnosis and prognostic assessment in TNBC patients. Further, there was a negative correlation between Survivin and ZIC1 expression. In addition, the “Survivin-positive ZIC1-negative group” was associated with histologic grade, lymph node metastasis, and TNM staging ( p < 0.001) and this was also an independent factor for evaluating the prognosis of TNBC in patients. Conclusion In summary, the expression levels of Survivin and ZIC1 in TNBC are different from those in normal tissues and are negatively correlated mutually. The combined detection of Survivin and ZIC1 expression levels could allow better comprehensive diagnosis and prognostic evaluation for TNBC patients.