ArticleMolecular and clinical oncology2017
A meta-analysis: The diagnostic values of long non-coding RNA as a biomarker for gastric cancer.
Article in Molecular and clinical oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Circulating long noncoding RNAs as potential biomarkers for stomach cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Pooled it
- The diagnostic and prognostic value of exosome-derived long non-coding RNAs in cancer patients: a meta-analysis.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Article
- Differential protein-coding gene and long noncoding RNA expression in smoking-related lung squamous cell carcinoma.Thoracic cancer · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) have been identified as novel biomarkers for the diagnosis, staging and prognosis for gastric cancer. However, various studies have reported a series of significances based on different diagnostic values. Therefore, the current study performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of lncRNAs for gastric cancer, and to discuss lncRNA types and sources of heterogeneity. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, the China Academic Journals Full-text Database and the Chinese Scientific Journals Database were systematically searched for potential studies. Studies were included if they were associated with lncRNAs, gastric cancer and reported diagnostic outcomes. Analysis of diagnostic values was used to summarize the overall test performance of lncRNAs. Ten studies were included in this meta-analysis. The ranges of the diagnostic value of lncRNAs for gastric cancer were as follows: Sensitivity was 0.45-0.83, and pooled sensitivity was 0.63; specificity was 0.60-0.93, and pooled specificity was 0.75; positive likelihood ratio was 1.80-6.92, and pooled positive likelihood ratio was 2.51; negative likelihood ratio was 0.23-0.67, and pooled negative likelihood ratio was 0.50; diagnostic odds ratio was 3.33-13.75, and pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 5.47. An overall area under the curve value of the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.7550. LncRNAs did not have a high accuracy for identifying gastric cancer at present, but may be a useful screening tool for diagnosing gastric cancer due to their correlation with gastric cancer biological features. LncRNAs are potential biomarkers for gastric cancer if the screening strategy is altered, or they are combined with other biomarkers to diagnose gastric cancer.
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.