Supplementary Material for: Association between HER-2 and lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) on the development of gastric cancer have been widely discussed in the literature. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the relationship between HER-2 and lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer using systematic evaluation and Meta-analysis, which can be of some clinical value for treatment and prognosis. METHODS Relevant databases were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flowchart. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were used to systematically search the literature published up to May 1, 2024. Twenty-one papers were screened and included for quantitative analysis, a data collection form was created, and the quality of the literature was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The results were represented by a Forest plot. I2 was used to assess heterogeneity, Begg's funnel plot was used to test for possible publication bias, and the source of heterogeneity was clarified by the Galbraith plot. Subgroup analyses were performed according to country and test method after excluding studies with significant heterogeneity. All statistical analyses were calculated using stata17.0. RESULTS A total of 624 papers were retrieved, and 21 were selected and included. Meta-analysis showed that there was heterogeneity between HER-2 positive and HER-2 negative mediators in the study (I2=68.0%, P<0.000). Therefore, the 95% CI (3.12, 95% CI: 2.10, 4.65) of the combined OR calculated by the random effects model was statistically significant. By comparing the incidence of lymph node metastasis between the HER-2 positive group and the HER-2 negative group, it was found that the incidence of lymph node metastasis between the two groups was significantly different. It is suggested that patients with HER-2 overexpression in cancer tissues may be more prone to lymph node metastasis. CONCLUSION This meta-analysis showed an association between HER-2 and positive lymph node status in gastric cancer patients. This could be valuable for selecting treatment options for gastric cancer 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.066 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.648 | 0.038 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".