ArticleTumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine2014
Clinical significance of microRNA expressions in diagnosing uterine cancer and predicting lymph node metastasis.
Article in Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- MicroRNA-155 hallmarks promising accuracy for the diagnosis of various carcinomas: results from a meta-analysis.Disease markers · 2015Pooled it
- Circulating plasma microRNAs in the detection of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Oncology letters · 2018Article
- Diagnostic value of strand-specific miRNA-101-3p and miRNA-101-5p for hepatocellular carcinoma and a bioinformatic analysis of their possible mechanism of action.FEBS open bio · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently, accumulating lines of evidence have demonstrated the association between microRNA (miRNAs) expression and uterine cancer, indicating that they may serve as promising novel biomarkers for uterine cancer. Therefore, we conducted this study to systematically evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of miRNAs in discriminating the uterine cancer patients from controls and further to determine their diagnostic values in lymph node metastasis (LNM) prediction. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and other parameters, together with summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve were used to assess the overall test performance. All statistical analyses were conducted using STATA 12.0 software. A total of nine articles were included in this meta-analysis. As for the accuracy of miRNAs in differentiating uterine cancer from controls, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under curve (AUC) were 0.84, 0.83, 4.8, 0.19, 25, and 0.90, respectively. As for the diagnostic accuracy of miRNAs in differentiating patients with LNM from those without LNM, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR, and AUC were 0.75, 0.78, 3.5, 0.32, 011, and 0.83, respectively. In addition, subgroup analyses based on miRNA profiles suggested that multiple-miRNA assay displayed much better accuracy than single-miRNA assay, with an excellent AUC of 0.98 (92% sensitivity and 96% specificity). The high accuracy of multiple-miRNA assay, together with the application of miRNAs in LNM prediction, suggested that miRNAs may serve as non-invasive diagnostic markers of uterine cancer and further improve the comprehensive management of patients with uterine cancer. However, further larger studies are needed to confirm our findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.