MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011664692 · doi:10.1007/s00432-020-03174-1

Role of the autophagy-related marker LC3 expression in hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis

2020· review· en· W3011664692 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yuchen Meng, Xiaoli Lou, Liyuan Yang, Dong Li, Yanqiang Hou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutophagy in Disease and Therapy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShanghai Municipal Health BureauNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsHepatocellular carcinomaMeta-analysisMedicineInternal medicineHazard ratioOncologyCochrane LibraryCirrhosisStage (stratigraphy)Confidence intervalBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Microtubule-associated protein 1 light chain 3 (LC3), an autophagic gene, has been reported as a vital marker for many diseases and cancers. However, the role of LC3 in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was not still investigated. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to examine the association of LC3 with its clinicopathological and prognostic in HCC. METHODS: We consulted the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wan Fang databases for published studies on LC3 in HCC. Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to screen the quality of the literature. The statistical analysis was calculated by STATA 14.2. RESULTS: Of the 1329 titles identified, 10 articles involving 949 patients in HCC were included in this meta-analysis. The results of our study show that increased LC3 expression is related to size of tumor, but not to gender, age, number of tumor, liver cirrhosis, HBsAg, TNM stage, alpha fetoprotein, vascular invasion and histological grade. Positive LC3 expression was associated with overall survival by pooled hazard ratio. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis indicated that positive LC3 expression was related to size of tumor, and could predict prognosis in human hepatocellular carcinoma.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.280
GPT teacher head0.548
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cancer Research and Clinical OncologySame topicAutophagy in Disease and TherapyFrench-language works237,207