Search

Objective This study aimed to explore the status quo, hot topics, and future prospects in the field of tumor hypoxia by scientometric analysis. Methods The literatures about tumor hypoxia were downloaded from the Web of Science Core Collection from inceptions to Dec.31st. 2018. We used CiteSpace 5.4.R1, VOSviewer 1.6.10 and Excel 2016 to analyze literature information, such as country, institution, author, keywords and references. Results A total of 4399 papers about tumor hypoxia were identified, involving 20157 authors from 3604 institutions in 84 countries. Vaupel P, Harris AL and Dewhirst MW published the most literatures. United States, China and United Kingdom contributed the most publications. The three most contributed institutions are the University of Toronto, Stanford University and Oxford University. International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics (n=175, IF2017=5.554), Cancer Research (n=144, IF2017=9.13) and Radiotherapy Oncology (n=114, IF2017=4.942) are the most productive journals. The main hot topics in tumor hypoxia field are tumor hypoxic cells and cytokines, tumor hypoxia therapy, tumor hypoxia diagnosis, tumor hypoxia prognosis. Conclusion Developed countries in Europe and America are dominant in the field of tumor hypoxia research. The diagnosis and treatment of tumor hypoxic is still a difficult problem, especially how to overcome the drug resistance caused by tumor hypoxic.

This paper aimed to explore the characteristics of the top-100 cited articles on the biomarkers in the depression field and strive to find the future trend. The top-100 cited articles were selected from the Web of Science Core Collection database. Excel 2016 and VOSviewer 1.6.9 were used to analyze the information. Forty-six journals contributed to these 100 articles, and Biological Psychiatry published the largest number of articles (n = 18). Holsboer F (n = 4) contributed the most, and Maes M (n = 118) was the most co-cited author. Twenty-six countries and 220 organizations contributed to the top-100 articles, respectively. The USA (n = 48) was the main contributor. NIMH and Kings Coll London both participated in seven articles. Major depression (n = 62), depression (n = 38) and biomarker (n = 31) were the top three keywords. These results indicated that articles published in journals with higher impact factors are more likely to spread. Compared with developing countries, developed countries have contributed more to these articles. It is suggested that cooperation should be strengthened between developed countries and developing counties in the future. More research on biomarkers in the depression field may still mainly focus on major depression. Abbreviation: WoS = Web of Science; JCR = Journal Citation Reports; UK = United Kingdom; NIMH = The National Institute of Mental Health; UCL = University College London; IF = Impact factor; BDNF = brain-derived neurotrophic factor; USA = United States [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several meta-analyses have evaluated the value of biomarkers in diagnosing breast cancer, but which biomarker has the optimal diagnostic value remains unclear. This overview aimed to compare the accuracy of different biomarkers in diagnosing breast cancer. PubMed, Embase.com, the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, and Web of Science were searched. The assessment of multiple systematic reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2) was used to assess the methodological quality and preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) for reporting quality. Pairwise meta-analyses were performed to estimate the pooled results for each biomarker, and indirect comparisons were conducted to compare diagnostic accuracy between biomarkers. Eleven systematic reviews (SRs) involving 218 original studies were included. All SRs were of critically low methodological quality, 3 SRs had minimal reporting flaws and 8 SRs had minor flaws. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.77 and 0.87 for miRNA, 0.70 and 0.87 for circulating cell-free DNA, 0.29 and 0.96 for APC gene promoter methylation, 0.69 and 0.99 for 14-3-3σ promoter methylation, 0.63 and 0.82 for CA153, 0.58 and 0.87 for CEA, and 0.73 and 0.56 for PSA. Compared with CA153 and PSA, miRNA had a higher sensitivity and specificity. The sensitivity of miRNA was higher than circulating cell-free DNA and CEA, although they had the same specificities. APC gene promoter methylation and 14-3-3σ promoter methylation were more specific than miRNA, but they had unacceptably low sensitivity. In conclusion, miRNA had better diagnostic accuracy than the other six biomarkers. But due to the low quality of included SRs, the results need to be interpreted with caution. Further study should investigate the diagnostic accuracy of different biomarkers in direct comparisons and focus on the value of combined biomarkers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a pandemic and the number of infected cases continues to rise. COVID-19, corona virus 2019 gl GLO:OCQ/01jan21:jmv26311-fig-0002.jpg PHOTO (COLOR): 2 Univariate meta-regression analysis on the mean age of patients for the association between tuberculosis and COVID-19 severity. In conclusion, people with tuberculosis are not more likely to get COVID-19, but pre-existing tuberculosis has a higher chance of developing serious complications from COVID-19. [Extracted from the article]