Observational studyMedicine2016
Makorin Ring Finger Protein 1 as Adjunctive Marker in Liquid-based Cervical Cytology.
Observational study in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To assess the utility of makorin ring finger protein 1 (MKRN1) as a marker of cervical pathology.A PROspective specimen collection and retrospective Blinded Evaluation study was conducted. Liquid-based cytology samples were collected from 187 women, embedding all residuals as cell blocks for immunohistochemical staining of MKRN1 and P16 . Results of liquid-based cervical cytology, immunostained cell block sections, and human papillomavirus (HPV) hybrid capture (with real-time polymerase chain reaction) were analyzed. Clinical outcomes were analyzed overall and in subsets of specimens yielding atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions.Makorin ring finger protein 1 positivity and grades (1-3) of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) increased in tandem (CIN1, 32.4%; CIN2, 60.0%; and CIN3, 80.0%), reaching 92.3% in invasive cancer. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value in detecting CIN2+ via MKRN1 were 73.8%, 76.8%, 75.6%, and 75.0%, respectively. The performance of liquid-based cytology was poorer by comparison (61.3%, 69.5%, 66.2%, and 64.8%, respectively), and HPV assay (versus MKRN1 immunohistochemical staining) displayed lower specificity (67.7%). Combined HPV + MKRN1 testing proved highest in sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value (71.8%, 85.5%, 82.3%, and 76.5%, respectively), whereas corresponding values for cytology + HPV (60.6%, 81.8%, 75.4%, and 69.2%) and cytology + MKRN1 (58.8%, 84.1%, 78.3%, and 67.7%) were all similar. In instances of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, the HPV + MKRN1 combination performed best by above measures (100%, 72.7%, 73.9%, and 100%), followed by cytology + MKRN1 (100%, 50.0%, 60.7%, and 100%).Makorin ring finger protein 1 displayed greater sensitivity and specificity than liquid-based cytology and proved more specific than HPV assay. In combination testing, MKRN1 + HPV showed the highest sensitivity and specificity levels. The MKRN1 biomarker may be a useful adjunct in primary cervical cytology screening.
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.