Page 117 - GPD-4-1

Gene & Protein in Disease Prognostic role of SIRT1 expression in cancer

Table 4. Quality appraisal of the included studies and their respective scores
Study Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Assessment
score*
Benard et al. 24          08
Li et al. 25          08
Grbesa et al. 26          08
Zhang et al. 27          08
Teramae et al. 28          07
Shuang et al. 11          08
Qiu et al. 29          08
Szász et al. 30          08
Chung et al. 31          08
Jeh et al. 32          08
Mvunta et al. 33          08
Gharabaghi et al. 34          07
Tan et al. 35          09
Beyer et al. 36          08
Chen et al. 37          08
Note: See full criteria for the assessment score in the Supplementary File.
a
could potentially improve patient outcomes. Furthermore, SIRT1 upregulation in all tumor stages except stage I,
the findings from Wu et al. align with our meta-analysis, correlating it with an unfavorable prognosis. Similarly, our
39
particularly regarding the association between high SIRT1 pooled analysis indicates a strong positive prognostic value
expression and poor OS in gastrointestinal cancers. Their for SIRT1 across various cancer types, underscoring its
research focused on non-colorectal gastrointestinal cancers, potential role in cancer prognosis, despite low variability
such as gastric cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma, across different study characteristics. This consistency in
reflecting trends consistent with our analysis. Their study the prognostic impact of SIRT1 across various cancers
39
also demonstrated a lack of association between SIRT1 further supports the conclusions drawn by Özcan et al.
40
expression and colorectal cancer outcomes, reinforcing the regarding gastric adenocarcinoma. In addition, the findings
distinct behavior of SIRT1 in colorectal cancer compared from Feng et al. support our results, demonstrating a
41
to other gastrointestinal cancers. The comprehensive significant correlation between high SIRT1 expression
approach and subgroup analyses by Wu et al. further and poor prognosis in gastric cardiac carcinoma. Their
39
support our understanding of SIRT1’s varying prognostic study highlighted elevated SIRT1 expression in malignant
value across different gastrointestinal cancer types. tumor tissues, associating it with lymphatic metastasis,
Similarly, our results are consistent with those of Wang TNM stage, and survival rates. This association between
et al., who found that SIRT1 overexpression significantly increased SIRT1 expression and adverse clinicopathologic
15
correlates with OS (HR: 1.483, 95% CI: 0.900 – 2.065), features aligns with our meta-analysis, emphasizing
supporting its prognostic relevance in solid malignancies. the potential of SIRT1 as a crucial marker for assessing
Our analysis, which included 3059 cases from 15 studies, malignancy and prognosis in gastric cardiac carcinoma.
41
reflects a consistent association with a strong positive Furthermore, the observed association between SIRT1
prognostic value, despite low variability (I = 0.00). While overexpression and advanced-stage tumors mirrors our
2
15
Wang et al. emphasized the negative prognosis associated meta-analysis findings across various cancers, suggesting
with SIRT1 overexpression, our meta-analysis highlights the consistent prognostic significance of SIRT1 expression.
the consistent and impactful association of SIRT1 without Jiang et al. specifically noted that SIRT1 overexpression
42
significant variability, signifying its substantial prognostic was correlated with poor overall and disease-free survival
role in various cancers. Moreover, our meta-analysis in colorectal cancer patients. This observation is consistent
aligns with the findings of Özcan et al., who observed an with our meta-analysis, where the pooled analysis indicated
40
association between SIRT1 overexpression and unfavorable a strong positive prognostic value for SIRT1 across different
prognosis in gastric adenocarcinoma. They reported cancer types, despite low variability among the studies

Volume 4 Issue 1 (2025) 9 doi: 10.36922/gpd.4294