Clinicopathological and prognostic value of LINC01296 in cancers: a meta-analysis

Figures & data

Figure 1. Flow chart of the study selection procedure in this meta-analysis.

Table 1. Characteristics of the eligible studies included in the meta-analysis (n = 9).

Study	Year	Cancer type	Tumour stage	Sample size	Cutoff value	Laboratory method	Follow-up months	Survival analysis	Outcome measures	HR (95% CI)	HR estimation method	NOS
Jiang et al.	2018	BRCA	I–IV	55	Mean	qRT-PCR	60	Univariate; multivariate	OS	2.70 (1.38–5.31); 2.34 (1.16–4.72)	Directly	8
Qin et al.	2018	GC	I–III	60	Mean	qRT-PCR	60	Univariate	OS	1.29 (1.06–1.57)	Indirectly	7
Wang1 et al.	2018	ESCA	I–IV	221	Mean	qRT-PCR	60	Univariate; multivariate	OS, DFS	3.78 (1.67–7.69); 2.89 (1.25–5.56)	Directly	8
Wang2 et al.	2018	ESCA	I–IV	78	Median	qRT-PCR	55	Univariate	OS	1.55 (1.07–2.24)	Indirectly	7
Wang3 et al.	2019	BLCA	I–IV	54	Mean	qRT-PCR	48	Univariate; multivariate	OS	5.74 (2.57–12.83); 5.02 (2.06–12.20)	Directly	8
Wu et al.	2017	PRCA	I–IV	70	Mean	qRT-PCR	60	Univariate; multivariate	OS	6.58 (1.95–22.22); 4.00 (1.04–15.67)	Directly	8
Xu et al.	2019	NSCLC	I–IV	40	Median	qRT-PCR	60	Univariate	OS	1.68 (1.08–2.60)	Indirectly	7
Yuan et al.	2019	PAAD	I–IV	85	Mean	qRT-PCR	60	Univariate; multivariate	OS	2.54 (1.55–4.19); 2.05 (1.22–3.47)	Directly	8
Zhang et al.	2018	CHOL	I–IV	57	Mean	qRT-PCR	64	Univariate	OS	1.72（1.02–2.88)	Indirectly	7

Notes: BRCA: breast cancer; GC: gastric cancer; ESCA: oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma; BLCA: bladder cancer; PRCA: prostate cancer; NSCLC: non-small cell lung cancer; PAAD: pancreatic adenocarcinoma; CHOL: cholangiocarcinoma; qRT-PCR: quantitative real time polymerase chain reaction; OS: overall survival; DFS: disease-free survival; HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval; NOS: Newcastle–Ottawa Scale.

Figure 2. Forest plots of studies evaluating (a) the association between LINC01296 expression with overall survival (OS), (b) independent prognostic value, (c) sensitivity analysis for OS, and (d) publication bias plots of OS. HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval.

Figure 3. Forest plots of the subgroup analysis evaluating HRs of LINC01296 for overall survival by the factors of (a) cancer type, (b) sample size, (c) follow-up month, and (d) HR estimation method. HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval.

Figure 4. Meta-analysis for the association between LINC01296 expression levels with clinicopathological parameters. The investigated clinicopathological parameters are: (a) clinical stage, (b) lymph node metastasis, (c) tumour size, and (d) differentiation.