Breast cancer (BC), the most common malignancy in women, has a high cancer-related mortality. Endoplasmic reticulum stress (ERS), a response to the accumulation of unfolded proteins, has emerging roles in tumorigenesis, including invasion, metastasis, immune escape, etc. However, few studies have focused on the correlation between ERS with long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) in BC. We attempted to construct an ERS-related lncRNA prognostic signature and study its value in BC from tumor mutational burden (TMB), tumor immune microenvironment (TIME), cluster, clinical treatment, and so on. In the present study, transcriptomic and clinical data of BC patients were extracted from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database. Correlation test, Cox regression analysis, least absolute shrinkage, and selection operator (LASSO) method were performed to determine an ERS-related lncRNA prognostic signature. Survival and predictive performance were analyzed according to Kaplan–Meier curves and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, while nomograms and calibration curves were established. Then, an enrichment analysis was performed to study the functions and biological processes of ERS-related lncRNAs. TMB and TIME were also analyzed to assess the mutational status and immune status. Additionally, by using consensus cluster analysis, we compared differences among tumor subtypes. Drug sensitivity analysis and immunologic efficacy evaluations were performed together for further exploration. We identified a novel prognostic signature consisting of 9 ERS-related lncRNAs. High-risk patients had worse prognoses. The signature had a good predictive performance as an independent prognostic indicator and was significantly associated with clinicopathological characteristics. Enrichment analysis showed that metabolic pathways were enriched in high-risk patients, while immune pathways were more active in low-risk patients. Low-risk patients had lower TMB, higher immune scores, and stronger immune functions. Cluster analysis clarified that cluster 2 had the most active immune functions and was sensitive to more drugs, which may have the best clinical immunological efficacy. A clinical efficacy evaluation revealed that patients in the low-risk group may benefit more from chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy. The novel signature has significant clinical implications in prognosis prediction for BC. Our study clarifies that there is a potential connection between the ERS-related lncRNAs and BC, which may provide new treatment guidelines for BC.
Although vaccination is regarded as one of the most significant achievements of public health, there also exists the phenomenon of vaccination hesitancy which refers to delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services. In this study, we conducted a bibliometric analysis to provide a comprehensive overview of vaccination hesitancy research from 2013 to 2022. All related publications were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection Database. Information on annual publications, countries, organizations, journals, authors, keywords, and documents was analyzed adopting the bibliometix R-package, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace software. A total of 4042 publications were enrolled. The annual publications increased slightly before 2020 but had an extremely dramatic increase from 2020 to 2022. The United States contributed the most articles and had the greatest collaboration with other countries and organizations. The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine was the most active institution. Vaccine was the most cited and influential journal while Vaccines was the most productive journal. It was Dube E who was the most productive authors with the highest h-index. The most frequent keywords were “vaccine hesitancy,” “COVID-19,” “SARS-CoV2,” “immunization,” “attitudes,” and “willingness.” Vaccination hesitancy to some extent hinders the achievement of global public health. The influencing factors vary across time, space, and vaccines. The COVID-19 pandemic and the development of COVID-19 vaccines have made this issue the focus of interest. The complexity and specific contexts of influencing factors of vaccination hesitancy require further study and will potentially be the focus of future research direction.
Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is one of the most recognized psychological interventions to improve the overall quality of life of cancer survivors. To analyze current research trends in the field of the link between CBT and cancer and to provide potential future research directions, we conducted the scientometric analysis. The study was conducted on all documents in this field from 2012 to 2022 retrieved from Web of Science. Then Biblioshiny, VOSviewer software, and CiteSpace software were used for getting the information of article postings and citations, countries, institutions, journals, authors, and keywords. The number of documents about the link between CBT and cancer from 2012 to 19 July 2022, was 619, with 476 of articles and 143 of reviews. The number of annual publications has been fluctuating, with the highest number of publications in 2020. The country with the maximum number of publications and citations was the US. The University of Houston was the organization with the highest quantity of publications and total link strength (TLS). Psycho-Oncology was the most active journal in the field and has the highest h-index. Zvolensky MJ was the author with the highest quantity of publications. The most cited keywords were “Quality-of-life,” “Cognitive-behavioral therapy,” “Depression,” “Cognitive therapy” and “Breast-cancer.” And as evidenced by the keyword citations, the focus of this research area has gradually shifted to the mental health of patients and the underlying pathogenesis. The impact of CBT in cancer treatment is now well established and has gradually evolved toward symptom-specific treatment. However, the relationship between CBT and cancer has not been further developed. Future research is needed to be further developed in the identification of a generic formula for CBT in cancer and the exploration of mechanisms of CBT and cancer.
Recently, the androgen receptor has been found as a potential prognostic index and therapeutic target for breast cancer. To reveal the current research status and hotspots in this area, we analyzed the characteristics of related publications from 2011 to 2020. All related publications from 2011 to 2020 were retrieved from the Web of Science. Biblioshiny, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace V were applied to obtain the information on annual publications and citations, the highest yielding countries and authors, influential journals and articles, as well as hot keywords. In total, 2,118 documents, including 1,584 original articles and 534 reviews, were retrieved. Annual publication output was rich from 2014 to 2018, reaching the top in 2017. A systematic review written by Lehman et al. in 2011 was the most-cited document and reference. The United States was the leading country with the maximum number of publications, citations, and link strengths with other countries. The journal publishing the most was Oncotarget. Lehmann was the author who had the highest link strengths with other authors. The most highlighted keywords were “androgen receptor” (n = 1,209), “breast cancer” (n = 690), “expression” (n = 545), “breast cancer” (n = 410), “prostate cancer” (n = 290), and so on, revealing the trend from molecular mechanism level to therapeutic use level. The androgen receptor plays a significant role in the development of breast cancers, whereas its therapeutic value seems to be controversial and needs further study. With the help of a scientometric analysis in this field, researchers can clarify the current research status and hotspots worth fully exploring.
Background and ObjectivePrevious studies determined the therapeutic effects of capecitabine-based chemotherapy regimens on early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, the optimal strategy of capecitabine-based chemotherapy remains uncertain. We conducted this network meta-analysis to address this issue.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) to retrieve eligible studies published before September 2021. Two independent reviewers extracted information from eligible studies using a pre-designed data extraction sheet. The primary outcome included disease-free survival, and the second outcome showed overall survival and adverse events. Direct meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4, and Bayesian network analysis was performed using R version 3.6.1 with the “gemtc” and “rjags” packages.ResultsNine studies involving 3661 TNBC patients met the selection criteria. The network meta-analysis suggested that the addition of capecitabine to adjuvant chemotherapy achieved a significantly longer disease-free (HR = 0.66, 95% CrI = 0.49 to 0.86) and overall survival time (HR = 0.60, 95% CrI = 0.43 to 0.83) than standard chemotherapy. All comparisons did not achieve statistical significance. The addition of capecitabine to adjuvant chemotherapy was the most effective treatment for improving disease-free (81.24%) and overall survival (78.46%) times, and the replacement of capecitabine to adjuvant chemotherapy was the safest regime.ConclusionsBased on available evidence, capecitabine-based chemotherapy benefits TNBC patients, and the addition of capecitabine with adjuvant chemotherapy was the most effective regime. In contrast, the replacement of capecitabine to adjuvant chemotherapy was the safest regime. More studies of high quality and large scale are needed to confirm our findings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.