| Title |
Prognostic value of SS18–SSX fusion type in synovial sarcoma; systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-015-1168-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tadahiko Kubo, Shoji Shimose, Jun Fujimori, Taisuke Furuta, Mitsuo Ochi |
| Abstract |
SS18-SSX (formerly called SYT-SSX) fusion gene has been established clinically as a molecular diagnostic test for synovial sarcoma, but the prognostic value of the fusion gene variant for survival is controversial. The objective of this systematic review is to provide an up-to-date and unprecedented summary of the prognostic impact of SS18-SSX fusion type in synovial sarcoma. Studies evaluating SS18-SSX fusion type as a prognostic marker in synovial sarcoma were systematically searched for in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Comparative analysis of the pooled hazard ratios (HR) between fusion types was carried out, in order to assess the likelihood of overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), progression-free survival (PFS), and metastasis-free survival (MFS). A total of 10 studies comprising 902 patients with synovial sarcoma were considered for the meta-analysis. The pooled HR for eight eligible studies evaluating for OS or DSS was 1.28 (95% confidence interval: 0.81-2.00), suggesting no significant difference between SS18-SSX1 and SS18-SSX2 (P = 0.29). For seven studies which evaluated for PFS or MFS, the presence of SS18-SSX1 may indicate a lower survival probability than that of SS18-SSX2, although the effect did not reach a level of statistical significance (P = 0.09). There was no significant difference in OS or DSS between SS18-SSX1 and SS18-SSX2, but there were indications of SS18-SSX1 being an unfavorable prognostic factor of PFS or MFS. Further studies including cohorts with a longer follow-up period are needed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 25% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 5% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 25% |
| Unknown | 5 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 35% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Decision Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 5 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 December 2020.
All research outputs
#14,699,563
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#823
of 1,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,671
of 263,292 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#51
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,850 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,292 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.