Cited by 649

Serum microRNA signatures identified in a genome-wide serum microRNA expression profiling predict survival of non-small-cell lung cancer

Hu, Zhibin, Chen, Xi, Zhao, Yang, Tian, Tian, Jin, Guangfu, Shu, Yongqian, Chen, Yijiang, Xu, Lin +3 more·2010·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Recent findings that human serum contains stably expressed microRNA (miRNA) have revealed a great potential of serum miRNA signature as disease fingerprints to predict survival. We used genome-wide serum miRNA expression analysis to investigate the role of serum miRNA in predicting prognosis of non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods: To control disease heterogeneity, we used patients with stages I to IIIa lung adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, who were treated with both operation and adjuvant chemotherapies. In the discovery stage, Solexa sequencing followed by individual quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) assays was used to test the difference in levels of serum miRNAs between 30 patients with longer survival (alive and mean survival time, 49.54 months) and 30 patients with shorter survival matched by age, sex, and stage (dead and mean survival time, 9.54 months). The detected serum miRNAs then were validated in 243 patients (randomly classified into two subgroups: n = 120 for the training set, and n = 123 for the testing set). Results: Eleven serum miRNAs were found to be altered more than five-fold by Solexa sequencing between longer-survival and shorter-survival groups, and levels of four miRNAs (ie, miR-486, miR-30d, miR-1 and miR-499) were significantly associated with overall survival. The four-miRNA signature also was consistently an independent predictor of overall survival for both training and testing samples. Conclusion: The four-miRNA signature from the serum may serve as a noninvasive predictor for the overall survival of NSCLC.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.2009.24.9342

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Among the miRNA biomarkers examined, variation attributable to blood cell effects was greater in magnitude than many differences reported between cancer patients and controls.

    “we observed variation attributable to blood cell effects that was greater in magnitude than many of the differences reported between cancer patients and controls (13, 15, 20).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hu, Z., Chen, X., Zhao, Y., Tian, T., Jin, G., Shu, Y., Chen, Y., Xu, L., Zen, K., Zhang, C., & Shen, H.
Affiliations
From the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Cancer Center; and Departments of Oncology and Thoracic Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Medical University; State Key Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, School of Life Sciences, Nanjing University; and the Department of Thoracic Surgery, Jiangsu Cancer Hospital, Nanjing, China.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2010-04-01
Volume
28
Issue
10
Pages
1721-1726
ISSN
  • 0732-183X
  • 1527-7755
Cited by
649
References
1
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review