The proto-oncogene RAS, coding for a 21 kDa protein (p21), is mutated in 20% of lung cancer. However, the literature remains controversial on its prognostic significance for survival in lung cancer. We performed a systematic review of the literature with metaanalysis to assess its possible prognostic value on survival. Published studies on lung cancer assessing prognostic value of RAS mutation or p21 overexpression on survival were identified by an electronic search. After a methodological assessment, we estimated individual hazard ratios (HR) estimating RAS protein alteration or RAS mutation effect on survival and combined them using metaanalytic methods. In total, 53 studies were found eligible, with 10 concerning the same cohorts of patients. Among the 43 remaining studies, the revelation method was immunohistochemistry (IHC) in nine and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in 34. Results in terms of survival were significantly pejorative, significantly favourable, not significant and not conclusive in 9, 1, 31, 2, respectively. In total, 29 studies were evaluable for meta-analysis but we aggregated only the 28 dealing with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and not the only one dealing with small-cell-lung cancer (SCLC). The quality scores were not statistically significantly different between studies with or without significant results in terms of survival, allowing us to perform a quantitative aggregation. The combined HR was 1.35 (95% CI: 1.16 -1.56), showing a worse survival for NSCLC with KRAS2 mutations or p21 overexpression and, particularly, in adenocarcinomas (ADC) (HR 1.59; 95% CI 1.26 -2.02) and in studies using PCR (HR 1.40; 95% CI 1.18 -1.65) but not in studies using IHC (HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.86 -1.34). RAS appears to be a pejorative prognostic factor in terms of survival in NSCLC globally, in ADC and when it is studied by PCR.

No abstract

Among new biological markers that could become useful prognostic factors for lung carcinoma, Ki-67 is a nuclear protein involved in cell proliferation regulation. Some studies have suggested an association between Ki-67 and poor survival in lung cancer patients. In order to clarify this point, we have performed a systematic review of the literature, using the methodology already described by our Group, the European Lung Cancer Working Party. In total, 37 studies, including 3983 patients, were found to be eligible. In total, 49% of the patients were considered as having a tumour positive for the expression of Ki-67 according to the authors cutoff. In all, 29 of the studies dealt with non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), one with small-cell carcinoma (SCLC), two with carcinoid tumours and five with any histology. In terms of survival results, Ki-67 was a bad prognosis factor for survival in 15 studies while it was not in 22. As there was no statistical difference in quality scores between the significant and nonsignificant studies evaluable for the meta-analysis, we were allowed to aggregate the survival results. The combined hazard ratio for NSCLC, calculated using a random-effects model was 1.56 (95% CI: 1.30 -1.87), showing a worse survival when Ki-67 expression is increased. In conclusion, our meta-analysis shows that the expression of Ki-67 is a factor of poor prognosis for survival in NSCLC.