SynthesisDisease markers2015
MicroRNA-155 hallmarks promising accuracy for the diagnosis of various carcinomas: results from a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Disease markers, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Discovery and function exploration of microRNA-155 as a molecular biomarker for early detection of breast cancer.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2021Pooled it
- Appraising MicroRNA-155 as a Noninvasive Diagnostic Biomarker for Cancer Detection: A Meta-Analysis.Medicine · 2016Pooled it
- Prognostic and Clinicopathological Significance of MiR-155 in Hematologic Malignancies: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of Cancer · 2019Review
- miR-340 and ZEB1 negative feedback loop regulates TGF-β- mediated breast cancer progression.Oncotarget · 2016Article
- DNA damage response (DDR) and senescence: shuttled inflamma-miRNAs on the stage of inflamm-aging.Oncotarget · 2015Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecent studies have shown that microRNAs (miRNAs) have diagnostic values in various cancers. This meta-analysis seeks to summarize the global diagnostic role of miR-155 in patients with a variety of carcinomas.
methodsEligible studies were retrieved by searching the online databases, and the bivariate meta-analysis model was employed to generate the summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) curve.
resultsA total of 17 studies dealing with various carcinomas were finally included. The results showed that single miR-155 testing allowed for the discrimination between cancer patients and healthy donors with a sensitivity of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.73-0.88) and specificity of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.70-0.83), corresponding to an area under curve (AUC) of 0.85, while a panel comprising expressions of miR-155 yielded a sensitivity of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.68-0.82) and specificity of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.77-0.86) in diagnosing cancers. The subgroup analysis displayed that serum miR-155 test harvested higher accuracy than plasma-based assay (the AUC, sensitivity, and specificity were, resp., 0.87 versus 0.73, 0.78 versus 0.74, and 0.77 versus 0.70).
conclusionsOur data suggest that single miR-155 profiling has a potential to be used as a screening test for various carcinomas, and parallel testing of miR-155 confers an improved specificity compared to single miR-155 analysis.
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.