Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26114756›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2015

Potential Role of Circulating microRNA-21 for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Diagnosis: A Meta-Analysis.

Qibin Liao, Peiyu Han, Yue Huang, Zhitong Wu, Qing Chen, Shanshan Li, Jufeng Ye, Xianbo Wu

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. BiomarkersWorld journal of clinical cases · 2019
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Qibin LiaoSchool of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Peiyu HanSchool of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Yue HuangSchool of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Zhitong WuSchool of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Qing ChenDepartment of Epidemiology, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Research, School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Shanshan LiSchool of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Jufeng YeExperimental Teaching Center of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Xianbo WuDepartment of Epidemiology, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Research, School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Southern Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCirculating microRNA-21 (miR-21) is known to be aberrantly expressed in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, and this implies that microRNA-21 is a promising and novel indicator of HCC. However, a systematic evaluation of the performance of microRNA-21 as a diagnostic marker for HCC has yet to be conducted. Therefore, the test performance of circulating miR-21 for HCC was assessed in this study.

methodsThree common international databases and a Chinese electronic database were used to search for literature on the diagnostic accuracy of microRNA-21 for HCC. The pooled results included the sensitivity and specificity of microRNA-21 for HCC detection and were analyzed with a random effect model. The area under summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to estimate overall test performance.

resultsA total of 339 HCC patients and 338 controls without HCC from four published studies were eligible for the meta-analysis and included in our study. The test performance of circulating miR-21 in HCC detection was assessed with the summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity, which were 81.2% (95% CI: 70.8% to 88.4%) and 84.8% (95% CI: 75.1% to 91.2%), respectively. The value of AUC was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.87 to 0.92). Significant inter-study heterogeneity was detected by our analysis, and sub-group analyses suggested that the type of control group was probably a source of heterogeneity.

conclusionsOur current findings suggested that circulating miR-21 can serve as a potential co-biomarker for early-stage HCC diagnosis. Thorough large-scale studies are needed to confirm the generalizability of our findings.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, HepatocellularHumansLiver NeoplasmsMicroRNAsBiomarkers, TumorMicroRNAs

Identifiers

PMID26114756
PMCPMC4483261
OpenAlexW791787195

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.