MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of PIMREG Expression on Prognosis in Glioma Patients: A Meta-Analysis

2024· article· en· W4407291840 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Regulators and Homeostatic Agents/Journal of Biological Regulators & Homeostatic Agents · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Mechanisms and Therapy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Technology Plan Project of Taizhou
KeywordsMeta-analysisGliomaExpression (computer science)OncologyInternal medicineMedicineCancer researchBiologyComputational biologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The phosphatidylinositol binding clathrin assembly protein interacting mitotic regulator (PIMREG) is highly expressed in osteosarcoma, cholangiocarcinoma, breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, and other cancer types, with its high expression being associated with poor cancer survival. At the same time, some studies have explored the association between PIMREG expression and glioma, but the results are controversial. Therefore, this study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to systematically evaluate the effect of PIMREG expression on the prognosis of glioma patients. Methods: The relevant literature published in English was accessed through various databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library from September 2023. The research articles were screened based on the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The quality of the literature was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Furthermore, hazard ratio (HR) and its corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for overall survival (OS) were either directly obtained from the original sources or derived from the Kaplan-Meier survival graphs using Engauge Digitizer 4.3. STATA 15.0 was selected for meta-analysis. Moreover, sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the stability of the included studies. Additionally, the Begg rank correlation method and Egger regression method were employed to evaluate the publication bias of the included literature. Results: Following a thorough screening process, 6 research articles were included in this study. Meta-analysis results showed that patients with high PIMREG expression had poorer OS (HR = 2.77, 95% CI: 1.83–3.71). The subgroup analysis revealed that the HR of OS was 2.32 (95% CI: 1.59–3.06) in the Asian population and 3.12 (95% CI: 0.80–5.44) in the non-Asian population. In subgroups of tumor types, the HR for OS was 2.71 (95% CI: 1.88–3.54) for patients with glioma type and 2.60 (95% CI: 0.87–4.34) for those with glioblastoma type. Furthermore, sensitivity analysis revealed that the stability of the included studies was good. Begg and Egger tests showed that in the meta-analysis, publication bias of the included literature was not significant ( p = 0.630). Conclusion: The high expression of PIMREG is associated with poor prognosis of glioma patients, indicating its application as a potential prognostic indicator for these patients.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.043
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological Regulators and Homeostatic Agents/Journal of Biological Regulators & Homeostatic AgentsSame topicCancer Mechanisms and TherapyFrench-language works237,207