- Primary research
- Open Access
Prognostic significance of CXCR7 in cancer patients: a meta-analysis
- Received: 20 August 2018
- Accepted: 7 December 2018
- Published: 19 December 2018
Abstract
Background
CXC chemokine receptor 7 (CXCR7) is frequently overexpressed in a variety of tumors. Nevertheless, whether CXCR7 can be used as a tumor prognosis marker has not been systematically assessed. The current meta-analysis was performed to obtain an accurate evaluation of the relationship between CXCR7 level and the prognosis of cancer patients.
Methods
Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed were systematically searched according to a defined search strategy up to June 11, 2018. Then, the required data were extracted from all qualified studies which were screened out based on the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Finally, the hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to evaluate the prognostic significance of CXCR7 in tumor patients.
Results
A total of 28 original research studies comprising 33 cohorts and 5685 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that CXCR7 overexpression was significantly related to worse overall survival (OS) (HR 1.72; 95% CI 1.49–1.99), disease-free survival (DFS) (HR 5.58; 95% CI 3.16–9.85), progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 2.83; 95% CI 1.66–4.85) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR 1.58; 95% CI 1.34–1.88) in cancer patients. Furthermore, for certain types of cancer, significant associations between higher CXCR7 expression and worse OS of glioma (HR 1.77; 95% CI 1.43–2.19), breast cancer (HR 1.45; 95% CI 1.28–1.63), esophageal cancer (HR 2.72; 95% CI 1.11–6.66) and pancreatic cancer (HR 1.46; 95% CI 1.12–1.90) were found. However, for lung cancer and hepatocellular cancer, there was no significant relationship between CXCR7 expression level and OS, (HR 2.40; 95% CI 0.34–17.07) and (HR 1.37; 95% CI 0.84–2.24) respectively.
Conclusions
Increased CXCR7 level could predict poor prognosis of tumor patients and might be regarded as a novel prognostic biomarker for tumor patients.
Keywords
- CXCR7
- Cancer
- Prognosis
- Meta-analysis
Background
Cancer is the primary cause of death in both developing and developed countries. In 2018, an estimated number of 1,735,350 new cancer cases and 609,640 cancer deaths are predicted to happen in the United States [1]. Due to the growth and aging of the population, as well as the increasing prevalence of established cancer risk factors, including overweight, physical inactivity, smoking, and changing reproductive patterns, the burden of cancer is still growing worldwide [2]. Although there are plenty of treatments for cancer, considering the low efficacy of treatments and poor prognosis of tumor patients, targeted therapies are desperately needed. Numerous biomarkers have been explored to improve the efficacy of oncotherapy and predict the prognosis of cancer patients. However, most cancer biomarkers currently used are not satisfactory [3]. Hence, it is essential to develop novel cancer biomarkers, not only provide novel therapeutic targets but also improve prognosis.
Chemokines are small proteins that primarily regulate cell trafficking and the differentiation and functions of various tissues [4]. Furthermore, chemokines and their receptors have been regarded as mediators of chronic inflammation, which exerts considerable influence on the development and progression of tumors [5]. Accumulating evidence has indicated that chemokines play crucial roles in the tumorigenesis and progress of cancer [6]. Among various chemokines, CXCL12 and CXCR4 are the most thoroughly investigated molecules. CXCR4 is the first identified receptor for CXCL12, and it is generally recognized that the CXCL12/CXCR4 axis participates in many aspects of cancer, such as the angiogenesis, metastasis, and the survival of cancer cells [7]. Consistent with the important roles of CXCL12/CXCR4 in cancer, many studies have proven that high levels of CXCL12 and CXCR4 are related to worse prognosis in various malignant tumors [8, 9].
CXC chemokine receptor 7 (CXCR7) is a newly found receptor for CXCL12, which is an atypical, chemokine-specific seven-transmembrane G protein-coupled receptor that does not mediate typical chemokine responses such as modulation of intracellular calcium mobilization or adenylyl cyclase activity [10]. Studies have demonstrated that the binding affinity of CXCL12 to CXCR7 is tenfold higher than to CXCR4. Similar to CXCR4, CXCR7 can also serve as a crucial regulator in several physiologic processes [11]. CXCR7 exerts essential functions in embryonic development and takes part in weakening chemotaxis of T lymphocytes induced by CXCL12 [11–14]. It also participates in trafficking of germ and progenitor cells during tissue repair and development [15, 16].
Recent studies have also reported that CXCR7 participates in tumorigenesis and tumor progress. Emerging evidence suggests that CXCR7 is extensively expressed in various tumor tissues and has the function of activating endothelial cells [17, 18], promoting the proliferation, migration, invasion, and metastasis of cancer cells [19–24]. In bladder cancer, high expression of CXCR7 has been associated with the proliferation, migration, and invasion of cancer cells, leading to rapid tumor progress [25]. Moreover, high expression of CXCR7 has indicated more lymphovascular invasion, regional lymph node metastasis and severe invasion in extramammary Paget disease [26]. Nowadays, some people have proposed that CXCR7 could be a novel prognostic biomarker for cancer patients. But because most studies published currently have limitation of sample size and discrete outcome, there is insufficient evidence to confirm the relationship between CXCR7 expression and the prognosis of cancer patients. Therefore, the present meta-analysis was performed to systematically evaluate the prognostic significance of CXCR7 expression in tumor patients.
Materials and methods
Study strategy
This meta-analysis was performed according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement [27]. For this study, we retrieved publications before 11 June 2018 from Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed using the following search terms: “CXCR7 or CXC chemokine receptor 7 or RDC1 or ACKR3 or GPRN1” AND “neoplasm or tumor or cancer or malignancy or carcinoma” AND “survival or prognosis or outcome or prognostic”. All relevant publications in reference lists were also searched manually to identify potentially qualified papers.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
In the present meta-analysis, the eligible studies or cohorts must have meet the following criteria: (1) The expression level of CXCR7 was detected in human tissues or plasma samples; (2) Tumors were diagnosed accurately by histopathology; (3) The relationship between CXCR7 expression level and survival rates of patients was evaluated; (4) Studies provided sufficient information to calculate the hazard ratio (HR) for survival rates, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Studies were excluded if they met any of the following criteria: (1) duplicate publications; (2) conference abstracts, case reports, reviews, patents, letters, non-English or unpublished articles; (3) studies merely concerned with cancer cell lines or animal models; (4) HRs and 95% CIs could not be extracted or calculated due to insufficient data.
Data extraction
Two researchers independently extracted all necessary data and reached an agreement on all contents. The third author made any decisions about confusing items. The extracted information in each study included: the first author’s name, the year of publication, region of the population enrolled, tumor type, sample size (high/low), follow-up time, type of sample detected, the endpoints, high or low expression accounting for poor prognosis, cut-off value, methods of obtaining HRs (directly or indirectly), survival analysis method and Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) score. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), progression-free survival (PFS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were considered to be endpoints. HRs that were directly obtained or calculated from Kaplan–Meier curves served as parameters to evaluate the relationship between CXCR7 expression level and prognosis of cancer patients [28].
Quality assessment
The NOS score ranging from 0 to 9 was used to assess the quality of the cohort studies. This system included the following three categories to evaluate each study: selection of study groups, comparability of groups and ascertainment of outcomes. A NOS scores ≥ 7 indicated high quality, and a NOS scores < 7 indicated low quality.
Statistical analysis
Pooled HRs (high/low) and their associated 95% CIs which were calculated using Stata version 14.0 (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA) demonstrated the relationship between CXCR7 expression level and prognosis of tumor patients. The heterogeneity among studies was estimated by the Cochrane’s Q test and the Higgins I2 statistic (p < 0.10 or I2 > 50% was considered significant) [29]. When heterogeneity was not significant (p > 0.10 and I2 < 50%), the fixed-effect model was used for analysis. Otherwise, the random-effect model seemed to be more appropriate. Furthermore, meta-regression and subgroup analyses were conducted to identify potential sources of heterogeneity, and the included cohorts were divided into two subgroups based on similar characteristics. Sensitivity analysis was performed by removing each cohort sequentially to explore possible explanations for heterogeneity. Publication bias was evaluated using Begg’s test and Egger’s test [30]. Due to the publication bias in this meta-analysis, we also conducted trim and fill analysis.
Results
Search results
The flow diagram indicated the process of study selection
Characteristics of studies included in the meta-analysis
Author | Year | Region | Type of cancer | Sample size (high/low) | Follow-up (month) | Endpoints | Expression associated with poor prognosis | Assay method | Cut-off value | Survival analysis | NOS score | Method |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Salazar et al. [31] | 2018 | USA | Glioma | 77 | 113 | OS | High | mRNA microarray data | Median | NA | 6 | 1 |
49 | 80 | OS | High | mRNA microarray data | Median | NA | 6 | 1 | ||||
Werner et al. [34] | 2018 | Germany | Thyroid carcinoma | 25/15 | 197 | OS, RFS | High | Tissue microarray IHC | Median | Univariate multivariate | 8 | 1 |
Qiao et al. [35] | 2018 | China | Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma | 23/22 | 40 | OS, PFS | High | IHC, RT-PCR | Median | NA | 7 | 2 |
Hao et al. [39] | 2018 | China | Breast cancer | 593 | 200 | RFS | High | cDNA-array | NA | NA | 6 | 1 |
Chang et al. [26] | 2017 | China | Extramammary paget disease | 21/71 | 130 | DFS | High | IHC | High: the product of intensity score and quantity score was 4–9 | Univariate and multivariate | 8 | 1 |
D’Alterio et al. [10] | 2010 | Italy | Renal cancer | 100/70 | 180 | DFS | High | IHC | High: stained (positive) tumor cells in 10 high power field (400×)/slide: > 20%. | Univariate and multivariate | 8 | 1 |
Hui et al. [48] | 2016 | China | Oral squamous cell carcinoma | 66 | 60 | OS | High | IHC | NA | NA | 6 | 2 |
Wani et al. [41] | 2014 | USA | Breast cancer | 85/440 | 220 | OS | High | RNA array datasets | High: ACKR3 (CXCR7 gene symbol) is greater than 1.0-fold of the standard deviation above the mean | NA | 6 | 2 |
Polimeno et al. [42] | 2015 | Italy | Hepatocellular carcinoma | 74/6 | 126 | OS | NS | IHC | High: stained (positive) tumor cells > 60% | Univariate | 7 | 1 |
11/28 | 87 | OS | NS | IHC | High: stained (positive) tumor cells > 60% | Univariate | 7 | 1 | ||||
D’Alterio et al. [24] | 2016 | Italy | Colorectal cancer | 14/16 | 66 | PFS | High | IHC | High: the rate of stained cancer cells was more than 50% | Univariate | 7 | 1 |
Tachezy et al. [36] | 2013 | Germany | Esophageal cancer | 72/87 | 178 | OS | NS | IHC | High: spots with staining intensity ≥ 2 were classified as CXCR7 positive | NA | 6 | 2 |
D’Alterio et al. [52] | 2014 | Italy | Rectal cancer | 43/21 | 127 | RFS | NS | IHC | High: the percentage of the total number of stained cells > 50% | Univariate | 7 | 1 |
Deng et al. [32] | 2017 | China | Glioblastoma | 77/69 | 43 | OS | High | IHC | High: the staining intensity score of CXCR7 > 1 | Univariate and multivariate | 7 | 1 |
Franco et al. [44] | 2012 | Italy | Non-small cell lung cancer | 19/26 | 26 | OS | High | IHC | High: the percentage of the total number of stained cells > 30% | Univariate and multivariate | 7 | 2 |
Gebauer et al. [46] | 2011 | Germany | Pancreatic adenocarcinoma | 47/202 | 175 | OS | NS | IHC | High: the percentage of the total number of stained cells > 20% | Multivariate | 7 | 2 |
Goto et al. [37] | 2017 | Japan | Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma | 40/73 | 97 | RFS | NS | IHC | High: the expression grades in cytoplasm ≥ 1 | Univariate and multivariate | 7 | 2 |
Guo et al. [23] | 2016 | China | Pancreatic cancer | 66/116 | 87 | OS | High | IHC | High: the multiplication of positive cell proportion score and staining score was 4–9 | Univariate and multivariate | 7 | 1 |
53/100 | 95 | OS | High | IHC | High: the multiplication of positive cell proportion score and staining score was 4–9 | Univariate and multivariate | 7 | 1 | ||||
Wang et al. [47] | 2012 | China | Renal cell carcinoma | 72/25 | 120 | OS, RFS | High | IHC | High: the percentage of the total number of stained cells ≥ 30% | Univariate and multivariate | 8 | 1 |
Iwakiri et al. [45] | 2009 | Japan | Nonsmall cell lung cancer | 44/35 | 66 | DFS, OS | High | RT-PCR | Median | Multivariate | 7 | 1 |
Li et al. [49] | 2015 | China | Chondrosarcoma | 49/11 | 65 | OS | High | IHC | High: the percentage of the total number of stained cells ≥ 10% | NA | 7 | 2 |
Liu et al. [33] | 2015 | USA | Glioma | 144/199 | 120 | OS | High | Microarray | High: fourfold elevated expression of CXCR7 | NA | 6 | 2 |
Ribas et al. [40] | 2014 | UK | Breast cancer | 125/375 | 144 | RFS | High | IHC | The highest quartile of the gene expression was used to dichotomise the patients into high and low groups (> 75%) | NA | 7 | 2 |
209/631 | 144 | RFS | High | IHC | The highest quartile of the gene expression was used to dichotomise the patients into high and low groups (> 75%) | NA | 7 | 2 | ||||
Nambara et al. [57] | 2016 | Singapore | Gastric Cancer | 98/98 | 60 | OS | High | RT-PCR | Median | NA | 7 | 2 |
Japan | Gastric Cancer | 98/97 | 60 | OS | High | RT-PCR | Median | NA | 7 | 2 | ||
Schrevel et al. [54] | 2012 | Netherlands | Cervical cancer | 43/58 | 266 | DFS | High | IHC | High: immunoreactivity was scored as weak, moderate or strong staining intensity | Univariate and multivariate | 8 | 1 |
Wu et al. [38] | 2015 | China | Breast cancer | 57/58 | 89 | OS | High | RT-PCR | Median | Univariate and multivariate | 7 | 1 |
Xue et al. [43] | 2014 | China | Hepatocellular carcinoma | 40/34 | 110 | OS, RFS | High | IHC | High: the percentage of tumor cells ≥ 80% (in 2+ intensity cells) or ≥ 30% (in 3+ intensity cells) were considered high | NA | 7 | 2 |
Yang et al. [51] | 2015 | China | Colorectal carcinoma | 62/34 | 60 | OS, PFS | High | IHC | High: the multiplication of positive cell proportion score and staining score ≥ 2 | Univariate and multivariate | 7 | 1 |
Yao et al. [53] | 2011 | China | Gallbladder cancer | 49/23 | 95 | OS | High | IHC | High: the multiplication of positive cell proportion score and staining score ≥ 2 | Univariate and multivariate | 7 | 1 |
Relationship between CXCR7 expression level and OS of tumor patients
Meta-analysis of the pooled HRs of OS for cancer patients
Results of subgroup analysis of pooled HRs of OS for cancer patients. a Subgroup analysis stratified by type of cancer. b Subgroup analysis stratified by sample size. c Subgroup analysis stratified by follow-up time. d Subgroup analysis stratified by the region. e Subgroup analysis stratified by source of HR. f Subgroup analysis stratified by NOS score
Subgroup analysis of pooled HRs for OS in cancer patients with abnormally expressed CXCR7
Subgroup analysis | No. of cohorts | Pooled HRs | Meta regression (p-value) | Heterogeneity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Random | I2 (%) | p-value | |||
Sample size | 0.122 | ||||
< 100 | 14 | 2. 04 [1.49–2.81] | – | 61.0 | 0.001 |
≥ 100 | 10 | 1.51 [1.3–1.66] | – | 0.0 | 0.798 |
Type of cancer | 0.379 | ||||
Digestive system carcinoma | 13 | 1.76 [1.45–2.14] | – | 8.5 | 0.361 |
Non-digestive system carcinoma | 11 | 1.70 [1.38–2.10] | – | 56.7 | 0.010 |
Follow-up time | 0.689 | ||||
< 100 | 15 | 1.77 [1.49–2.11] | – | 36.9 | 0.075 |
≥ 100 | 9 | 1.67 [1.23–2.26] | – | 50.3 | 0.041 |
The region | 0.229 | ||||
Asia | 14 | 1.88 [1.54–2.28] | – | 44.0 | 0.039 |
Other countries | 10 | 1.54 [1.20–1.98] | – | 38.9 | 0.099 |
NOS score | 0.604 | ||||
≥ 7 | 18 | 1.69 [1.40–2.04] | – | 48.9 | 0.010 |
< 7 | 6 | 1.86 [1.52–2.28] | – | 0.0 | 0.939 |
Source of HR | 0.074 | ||||
Directly | 13 | 1.52 [1.28–1.81] | – | 42.5 | 0.053 |
Indirectly | 11 | 2.03 [1.67–2.47] | – | 0.0 | 0.640 |
Relationship between CXCR7 expression level and OS in certain types of cancer
Meta-analysis of the pooled HRs of OS for glioma (a), breast cancer (b), esophageal cancer (c), pancreatic cancer (d), lung cancer (e) and hepatocellular cancer (f)
Relationship between CXCR7 expression level and PFS, RFS and DFS of tumor patients
Meta-analysis of the pooled HRs of PFS (a), RFS (b) and DFS (c) for cancer patients
Sensitivity analysis
Sensitivity analysis plot of pooled HRs of OS (a), RFS (b), DFS (c) and PFS (d) for cancer patients with abnormally expressed CXCR7
Publication bias
Egger’s test (a) and Begg’s test (b) for publication bias. Trim and fill analysis of the eligible studies for the present meta-analysis (c)
Discussion
So far, there is substantial evidence that CXCR7 plays a crucial part in proliferation, migration, invasion and metastasis of different cancers, indicating poor prognosis of cancer patients [41, 55]. It was reported that the expression of CXCR7 was higher in gallbladder cancer patients, which was associated with advanced TNM stage and poorer survival [53]. Gebauer et al. showed that in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, CXCR7 was highly expressed, which played important roles in tumor cell proliferation and metastasis [46]. Furthermore, the expression level of CXCR7 was significantly higher in gastric cancer cells than normal cells and elevated CXCR7 expression level was related to peritoneal metastasis and worse prognosis of gastric tumor patients [50]. Given the important functions of CXCR7 in cancer, many researchers have proposed that CXCR7 might be a potential prognostic biomarker for tumor patients [56, 57]. Nevertheless, whether CXCR7 could serve as a promising biomarker for predicting the survival of tumor patients remains controversial because most studies published to date have deficiencies in sample size and discrete outcomes.
At present, our meta-analysis systematically evaluated the reported studies concerning CXCR7 expression level and tumor patients’ prognosis. All of the survival data from 28 independent studies, including 33 cohorts and 5685 cancer patients, were systematically analyzed. The results showed that higher CXCR7 was significantly associated with worse OS of tumor patients. Because of the heterogeneity in these articles, subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis were conducted to explore the sources of heterogeneity. The subgroup analyses indicated that the significant association between high CXCR7 expression level and poor OS of tumor patients was not changed by region, sample size, type of cancer, paper quality, source of HR or follow-up time. Moreover, the meta-regression analysis failed to identify the source of the heterogeneity in all covariates. However, by meta-regression analysis, the p-value for the source of HR was relatively low (p = 0.074), which indicated that the way we obtained HR might account for the heterogeneity of our analysis. Furthermore, we combined HRs from Cox multivariate analyses. The results demonstrated that CXCR7 acted as an independent prognostic factor for OS of tumor patients. In addition, the sensitivity analysis of OS showed that the three cohorts from Wu et al., Li et al. and Werner et al. influenced the results significantly, which showed that these three cohorts might account for the heterogeneity. All the values of HR in the list were greater than 1, indicating that our results are stable and reliable.
We also assessed the prognostic impact of CXCR7 on six kinds of cancer. The results demonstrated that higher CXCR7 expression was related to worse OS in glioma, breast cancer, esophageal cancer and pancreatic cancer, which was in accordance with previous studies. Nevertheless, for lung cancer and hepatocellular cancer, no significant association between CXCR7 expression with OS of cancer patients was found. The reason why the result of lung cancer was contrary to others might be because of the limited sample size and different clinical characteristics of recruited patients. For example, the results from Iwakiri et al. [45] have demonstrated that the significant association between high expression of CXCR7 and poor prognosis of tumor patients existed only in patients with p-stage I NSCLC, not in patients with p-stage II–III NSCLC, because tissues of p-stage II–III NSCLC include both patients exposed to preoperative therapy and not. For hepatocellular cancer, the inconsistent meta-analysis results might be the reason that CXCR7 was not the only factor influencing the prognosis of hepatocellular cancer patients. Because Polimeno et al. have found that high expression of CXCR7 was also regulated by more finely tuned CXCR4–CXCL12 level in hepatocellular cancer [42]. Thus, larger-scale, multicenter studies including all stages of patients are necessary to confirm our hypothesis for lung cancer. Furthermore, more studies are needed to explore the specific function of the CXCL12/CXCR4/CXCR7 axis in hepatocellular cancer.
The relationships between CXCR7 expression level with PFS, RFS and DFS was evaluated in our meta-analysis as well. The results indicated that cancer patients with higher CXCR7 expression level had shorter PFS, RFS and DFS. The sensitivity analysis showed that all cohorts affected the results greatly, which might be because of the small quantity of cohorts included. Thus, it will be necessary to do more research concerning the effects of CXCR7 on PFS, RFS and DFS of cancer patients.
The underlying mechanisms involved in the relationship between CXCR7 overexpression and poor prognosis of tumor patients have been extensively investigated. Accumulating evidence has proven that CXCR7 exerts pleiotropic effects in tumor cell survival, proliferation, migration, invasion and metastasis. CXCR7 can mediate epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) phosphorylation in a CXCR7 ligand-independent way, which enhances EGFR-mediated mitogenic signaling and plays a vital role in proliferation of prostate and breast cancer cells [58, 59]. In bone sarcomas, the binding of CXCL12 to CXCR7 can activate the PI3K-Akt-NF-κΒ and MEK-ERK-IKKαβ-NF-κΒ pathways, which regulates the proliferation/survival as well as the migration/metastasis of tumor cells [60]. Furthermore, CXCR7 might promote colorectal cancer progression via regulation of the p-ERK and β-arrestin pathways [61]. Moreover, Wu et al. [62] demonstrated that CXCR7 was responsible for TGFβ1-related cell migration, invasion, epithelial–mesenchymal transition and tumor-initiating features in lung cancer. What’s more, CXCR7/TGFβ1 coexpression was positively correlated with the expression of CD44, a cancer stem cell marker promoting lymph node metastasis in lung cancer. In addition, the entire CXCR4–CXCL12–CXCR7 axis could activate the mTOR pathway and stimulate cell migration in human A498 and SN12C renal cancer cells [63]. Thus, highly expressed CXCR7 could promote the progression of cancer via various signal pathways. However, more studies are still needed to elucidate the specific mechanisms of the pro-tumor effects of CXCR7, especially for certain types of cancer, such as hepatocellular cancer.
Some limitations existed in the present meta-analysis. First, we could not obtain HRs of some cohorts from the publications directly. The calculating method of HRs and corresponding 95% CIs through survival curves might not be precise enough. Second, all cohorts included in this meta-analysis did not agree on the cutoff value of CXCR7 expression, which could cause heterogeneity among the studies. Third, the existence of publication bias might exaggerate the influence of CXCR7 on the prognosis of cancer patients to some degree. Moreover, due to language limitations, studies published in other languages were not included because of difficulties in obtaining information accurately.
Conclusions
The high expression of CXCR7 could act as a risk factor for shorter OS, PFS, RFS and DFS in cancer patients based on the current published data. It seems reasonable to assume that CXCR7 might become a promising biomarker for the prognosis of cancer patients. Additionally, developing strategies against CXCR7 would be a novel therapy for tumors. This meta-analysis systematically evaluated the impact of CXCR7 expression level on the prognosis of tumor patients. In the future, large-scale, well-designed studies with more information about potential correlative factors are necessary to assess the value of CXCR7 in human cancer.
Abbreviations
- CI:
-
confidence intervals
- HR:
-
hazard ratios
- OS:
-
overall survival
- DFS:
-
disease-free survival
- PFS:
-
progression-free survival
- RFS:
-
recurrence-free survival
- IHC:
-
immunohistochemistry
- RT-PCR:
-
real time polymerase chain reaction
- EGFR:
-
epidermal growth factor receptor
Declarations
Authors’ contributions
HF and WW collected, extracted and analyzed the data, wrote the paper; JY and LX performed quality assessment and analyzed the data. LY conceived and designed this study. All authors reviewed the paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the researchers and study participants for their contributions.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Availability of data and materials
The datasets during and/or analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Funding
This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 81570530,81370550, 30500658 to LY)
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Authors’ Affiliations
References
- Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(1):7–30.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(2):87–108.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Shi D, Wu F, Gao F, Qing X, Shao Z. Prognostic value of long non-coding RNA CCAT1 expression in patients with cancer: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(6):e0179346.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Mukaida N, Sasaki S, Baba T. Chemokines in cancer development and progression and their potential as targeting molecules for cancer treatment. Mediators Inflamm. 2014;2014:170381.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Lazennec G, Richmond A. Chemokines and chemokine receptors: new insights into cancer-related inflammation. Trends Mol Med. 2010;16(3):133–44.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Keeley EC, Mehrad B, Strieter RM. CXC chemokines in cancer angiogenesis and metastases. Adv Cancer Res. 2010;106:91.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Teicher BA, Fricker SP. CXCL12 (SDF-1)/CXCR4 pathway in cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16(11):2927–31.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Lu CL, Guo J, Gu J, Ge D, Ding JY, Lin ZW. The expressions of CXCL12/CXCR4 in the tissues of primary tumor and lymph node metastasis with esophageal squamous cancer and their clinical significance. Fudan Univ J Med Sci. 2013;40(2):127–32.Google Scholar
- Saigusa S, Toiyama Y, Tanaka K, Yokoe T, Okugawa Y, Kawamoto A, Yasuda H, Inoue Y, Miki C, Kusunoki M. Stromal CXCR4 and CXCL12 expression is associated with distant recurrence and poor prognosis in rectal cancer after chemoradiotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(8):2051–8.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- D’Alterio C, Consales C, Polimeno M, Franco R, Cindolo L, Portella L, Cioffi M, Calemma R, Marra L, Claudio L, et al. Concomitant CXCR4 and CXCR7 expression predicts poor prognosis in renal cancer. Curr Cancer Drug Targets. 2010;10(7):772–81.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Balabanian K, Lagane B, Infantino S, Chow KY, Harriague J, Moepps B, Arenzana-Seisdedos F, Thelen M, Bachelerie F. The chemokine SDF-1/CXCL12 binds to and signals through the orphan receptor RDC1 in T lymphocytes. J Biol Chem. 2005;280(42):35760–6.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Gerrits H, van Ingen Schenau DS, Bakker NE, van Disseldorp AJ, Strik A, Hermens LS, Koenen TB, Krajnc-Franken MA, Gossen JA. Early postnatal lethality and cardiovascular defects in CXCR7-deficient mice. Genesis. 2008;46(5):235–45.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wang Y, Li G, Stanco A, Long JE, Crawford D, Potter GB, Pleasure SJ, Behrens T, Rubenstein JL. CXCR4 and CXCR7 have distinct functions in regulating interneuron migration. Neuron. 2011;69(1):61–76.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Sanchez-Alcaniz JA, Haege S, Mueller W, Pla R, Mackay F, Schulz S, Lopez-Bendito G, Stumm R, Marin O. Cxcr7 controls neuronal migration by regulating chemokine responsiveness. Neuron. 2011;69(1):77–90.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Mazzinghi B, Ronconi E, Lazzeri E, Sagrinati C, Ballerini L, Angelotti ML, Parente E, Mancina R, Netti GS, Becherucci F, et al. Essential but differential role for CXCR4 and CXCR7 in the therapeutic homing of human renal progenitor cells. J Exp Med. 2008;205(2):479–90.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Boldajipour B, Mahabaleshwar H, Kardash E, Reichman-Fried M, Blaser H, Minina S, Wilson D, Xu Q, Raz E. Control of chemokine-guided cell migration by ligand sequestration. Cell. 2008;132(3):463–73.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Tripathi V, Verma R, Dinda A, Malhotra N, Kaur J, Luthra K. Differential expression of RDC1/CXCR7 in the human placenta. J Clin Immunol. 2009;29(3):379–86.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Martinez A, Kapas S, Miller MJ, Ward Y, Cuttitta F. Coexpression of receptors for adrenomedullin, calcitonin gene-related peptide, and amylin in pancreatic beta-cells. Endocrinology. 2000;141(1):406–11.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Levoye A, Balabanian K, Baleux F, Bachelerie F, Lagane B. CXCR7 heterodimerizes with CXCR4 and regulates CXCL12-mediated G protein signaling. Blood. 2009;113(24):6085–93.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Zabel BA, Wang Y, Lewen S, Berahovich RD, Penfold ME, Zhang P, Powers J, Summers BC, Miao Z, Zhao B, et al. Elucidation of CXCR7-mediated signaling events and inhibition of CXCR4-mediated tumor cell transendothelial migration by CXCR7 ligands. J Immunol. 2009;183(5):3204–11.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Miao Z, Luker KE, Summers BC, Berahovich R, Bhojani MS, Rehemtulla A, Kleer CG, Essner JJ, Nasevicius A, Luker GD, et al. CXCR7 (RDC1) promotes breast and lung tumor growth in vivo and is expressed on tumor-associated vasculature. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104(40):15735–40.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Long P, Sun F, Ma Y, Huang Y. Inhibition of CXCR4 and CXCR7 for reduction of cell proliferation and invasion in human endometrial cancer. Tumour Biol. 2016;37(6):7473–80.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Guo JC, Li J, Zhou L, Yang JY, Zhang ZG, Liang ZY, Zhou WX, You L, Zhang TP, Zhao YP. CXCL12-CXCR7 axis contributes to the invasive phenotype of pancreatic cancer. Oncotarget. 2016;7(38):62006–18.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- D’Alterio C, Nasti G, Polimeno M, Ottaiano A, Conson M, Circelli L, Botti G, Scognamiglio G, Santagata S, De Divitiis C, et al. CXCR4-CXCL12-CXCR7, TLR2-TLR4, and PD-1/PD-L1 in colorectal cancer liver metastases from neoadjuvant-treated patients. Oncoimmunology. 2016;5(12):e1254313.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Nazari A, Khorramdelazad H, Hassanshahi G. Biological/pathological functions of the CXCL12/CXCR4/CXCR7 axes in the pathogenesis of bladder cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 2017;22(6):991–1000.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Chang K, Li GX, Kong YY, Shen XX, Qu YY, Jia ZW, Wang Y, Dai B, Ye DW. Chemokine receptors CXCR4 and CXCR7 are associated with tumor aggressiveness and prognosis in extramammary paget disease. J Cancer. 2017;8(13):2471–7.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):e1–34.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Parmar MK, Torri V, Stewart L. Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints. Stat Med. 1998;17(24):2815–34.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557–60.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315(7109):629–34.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Salazar N, Carlson JC, Huang KX, Zheng YY, Oderup C, Gross J, Jang AD, Burke TM, Lewen S, Scholz A, et al. A chimeric antibody against ACKR3/CXCR7 in combination with TMZ activates immune responses and extends survival in mouse GBM models. Mol Ther. 2018;26(5):1354–65.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Deng L, Zheng W, Dong X, Liu J, Zhu C, Lu D, Zhang J, Song L, Wang Y, Deng D. Chemokine receptor CXCR7 is an independent prognostic biomarker in glioblastoma. Cancer Biomark. 2017;20(1):1–6.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Liu Y, Carson-Walter E, Walter KA. Targeting chemokine receptor CXCR7 inhibits glioma cell proliferation and mobility. Anticancer Res. 2015;35(1):53–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Werner TA, Forster CM, Dizdar L, Verde PE, Raba K, Schott M, Knoefel WT, Krieg A. CXCR4/CXCR7/CXCL12-axis in follicular thyroid carcinoma. J Cancer. 2018;9(6):929–40.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Qiao Y, Zhang C, Li A, Wang D, Luo Z, Ping Y, Zhou B, Liu S, Li H, Yue D, et al. IL6 derived from cancer-associated fibroblasts promotes chemoresistance via CXCR7 in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Oncogene. 2018;37(7):873–83.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Tachezy M, Zander H, Gebauer F, von Loga K, Pantel K, Izbicki JR, Bockhorn M. CXCR7 expression in esophageal cancer. J Transl Med. 2013;11:238.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Goto M, Yoshida T, Yamamoto Y, Furukita Y, Inoue S, Fujiwara S, Kawakita N, Nishino T, Minato T, Yuasa Y, et al. CXCR4 expression is associated with poor prognosis in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(3):832–40.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wu W, Qian LY, Chen XD, Ding BN. Prognostic significance of CXCL12, CXCR4, and CXCR7 in patients with breast cancer. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015;8(10):13217–24.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Hao M, Weng X, Wang Y, Sun X, Yan T, Li Y, Hou L, Meng X, Wang J. Targeting CXCR7 improves the efficacy of breast cancer patients with tamoxifen therapy. Biochem Pharmacol. 2018;147:128–40.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ribas R, Ghazoui Z, Gao Q, Pancholi S, Rani A, Dunbier A, Dowsett M, Martin L-A. Identification of chemokine receptors as potential modulators of endocrine resistance in oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res. 2014;16(5):447.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wani NA, Nasser MW, Ahirwar DK, Zhao H, Miao Z, Shilo K, Ganju RK. C-X-C motif chemokine 12/C-X-C chemokine receptor type 7 signaling regulates breast cancer growth and metastasis by modulating the tumor microenvironment. Breast Cancer Res. 2014;16(3):R54.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Polimeno MN, Ierano C, D’Alterio C, Losito NS, Napolitano M, Portella L, Scognamiglio G, Tatangelo F, Trotta AM, Curley S, et al. CXCR4 expression affects overall survival of HCC patients whereas CXCR7 expression does not. Cell Mol Immunol. 2015;12(4):474–82.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Xue T-C, Jia Q-A, Bu Y, Chen R-X, Cui J-P, Tang Z-Y, Ye S-L. CXCR7 correlates with the differentiation of hepatocellular carcinoma and suppresses HNF4 alpha expression through the ERK pathway. Oncol Rep. 2014;32(6):2387–96.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Franco R, Pirozzi G, Scala S, Cantile M, Scognamiglio G, Camerlingo R, Botti G, Rocco G. CXCL12-binding receptors expression in non-small cell lung cancer relates to tumoral microvascular density and CXCR4 positive circulating tumoral cells in lung draining venous blood. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012;41(2):368–75.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Iwakiri S, Mino N, Takahashi T, Sonobe M, Nagai S, Okubo K, Wada H, Date H, Miyahara R. Higher expression of chemokine receptor CXCR7 is linked to early and metastatic recurrence in pathological stage I nonsmall cell lung cancer. Cancer. 2009;115(11):2580–93.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Gebauer F, Tachezy M, Effenberger K, von Loga K, Zander H, Marx A, Kaifi JT, Sauter G, Izbicki JR, Bockhorn M. Prognostic impact of CXCR4 and CXCR7 expression in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. J Surg Oncol. 2011;104(2):140–5.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wang L, Chen W, Gao L, Yang Q, Liu B, Wu Z, Wang Y, Sun Y. High expression of CXCR4, CXCR7 and SDF-1 predicts poor survival in renal cell carcinoma. World J Surg Oncol. 2012;10:212.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hui Y, Li Y, Jing Y, Feng J-Q, Ding Y. miRNA-101 acts as a tumor suppressor in oral squamous cell carcinoma by targeting CX chemokine receptor 7. Am J Transl Res. 2016;8(11):4902–11.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Li G, Yang Y, Xu S, Ma L, He M, Zhang Z. Slug signaling is up-regulated by CCL21/CXCR7 to induce EMT in human chondrosarcoma. Med Oncol. 2015;32(2):2.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Nambara S, Iguchi T, Oki E, Tan P, Maehara Y, Mimori K. Overexpression of CXCR7 is a novel prognostic indicator in gastric cancer. Dig Surg. 2017;34(4):312–8.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Yang D, Dai T, Xue L, Liu X, Wu B, Geng J, Mao X, Wang R, Chen L, Chu X. Expression of chemokine receptor CXCR7 in colorectal carcinoma and its prognostic significance. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015;8(10):13051–8.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- D’Alterio C, Avallone A, Tatangelo F, Delrio P, Pecori B, Cella L, Pelella A, D’Armiento FP, Carlomagno C, Bianco F, et al. A prognostic model comprising pT stage, N status, and the chemokine receptors CXCR4 and CXCR7 powerfully predicts outcome in neoadjuvant resistant rectal cancer patients. Int J Cancer. 2014;135(2):379–90.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Yao X, Zhou L, Han S, Chen Y. High Expression of CXCR4 and CXCR7 predicts poor survival in gallbladder cancer. J Int Med Res. 2011;39(4):1253–64.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Schrevel M, Karim R, ter Haar NT, van der Burg SH, Trimbos JBMZ, Fleuren GJ, Gorter A, Jordanova ES. CXCR7 expression is associated with disease-free and disease-specific survival in cervical cancer patients. Br J Cancer. 2012;106(9):1520–5.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Liu Y, Carson-Walter EB, Whiteman M, Walter KA. CXCR7 regulates glioma cell proliferation, migration, invasion, and tumor development. Neuro Oncol. 2009;2009:589.Google Scholar
- Yates TJ, Knapp J, Gosalbez M, Lokeshwar SD, Gomez CS, Benitez A, Ekwenna OO, Young EE, Manoharan M, Lokeshwar VB. CXCR7: a functionally associated molecular marker for bladder cancer. Cancer. 2013;119(1):61.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Nambara S, Iguchi T, Oki E, Tan P, Maehara Y, Mimori K. Overexpression of CXCR7 is a novel prognostic indicator in gastric cancer. Dig Surg. 2016;34(4):312.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hoy JJ, Kallifatidis G, Smith DK, Lokeshwar BL. Inhibition of androgen receptor promotes CXC-chemokine receptor 7-mediated prostate cancer cell survival. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):3058.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Salazar N, Munoz D, Kallifatidis G, Singh RK, Jorda M, Lokeshwar BL. The chemokine receptor CXCR7 interacts with EGFR to promote breast cancer cell proliferation. Mol Cancer. 2014;13:198.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Liao YX, Zhou CH, Zeng H, Zuo DQ, Wang ZY, Yin F, Hua YQ, Cai ZD. The role of the CXCL12-CXCR4/CXCR7 axis in the progression and metastasis of bone sarcomas (Review). Int J Mol Med. 2013;32(6):1239–46.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Li XX, Zheng HT, Huang LY, Shi DB, Peng JJ, Liang L, Cai SJ. Silencing of CXCR7 gene represses growth and invasion and induces apoptosis in colorectal cancer through ERK and beta-arrestin pathways. Int J Oncol. 2014;45(4):1649–57.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wu YC, Tang SJ, Sun GH, Sun KH. CXCR7 mediates TGFbeta1-promoted EMT and tumor-initiating features in lung cancer. Oncogene. 2016;35(16):2123–32.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ierano C, Santagata S, Napolitano M, Guardia F, Grimaldi A, Antignani E, Botti G, Consales C, Riccio A, Nanayakkara M, et al. CXCR4 and CXCR7 transduce through mTOR in human renal cancer cells. Cell Death Dis. 2014;5:e1310.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
