ArticleScientific reports2017
Improved risk stratification in prevention by use of a panel of selected circulating microRNAs.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unraveling Non-coding RNAs and dysregulation of TGF-β signalling in cardiorenal syndrome, a focused review for molecular and clinical applications.Molecular biology reports · 2025Review
- Circulating Microvesicles Enriched in miR-126-5p and miR-223-3p: Potential Biomarkers in Acute Coronary Syndrome.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- MicroRNAs and Cardiovascular Disease Risk.Current cardiology reports · 2024Review
- The Profile of Circulating Blood microRNAs in Outpatients with Vulnerable and Stable Atherosclerotic Plaques: Associations with Cardiovascular Risks.Non-coding RNA · 2022Article
- Article
- Circulating MicroRNAs as Novel Biomarkers in Risk Assessment and Prognosis of Coronary Artery Disease.European cardiology · 2022Review
- A Review on the Evolving Roles of MiRNA-Based Technologies in Diagnosing and Treating Heart Failure.Cells · 2021Review
- Cardiorenal Syndrome: New Pathways and Novel Biomarkers.Biomolecules · 2021Review
- MiR-223 levels predicting perioperative bleeding in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Article
- Extracellular miRNAs: From Biomarkers to Mediators of Physiology and Disease.Cell metabolism · 2019Review
- Platelet microRNAs and vascular injury.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2019Article
- Circulating miR-26a, miR-106b, miR-107 and miR-133b stratify hepatocellular carcinoma patients according to their response to transarterial chemoembolization.Clinical biochemistry · 2019Article
- The Potential Role of Platelet-Related microRNAs in the Development of Cardiovascular Events in High-Risk Populations, Including Diabetic Patients: A Review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2018Review
- MicroRNAs in Heart Failure, Cardiac Transplantation, and Myocardial Recovery: Biomarkers with Therapeutic Potential.Current heart failure reports · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Risk stratification is crucial in prevention. Circulating microRNAs have been proposed as biomarkers in cardiovascular disease. Here a miR panel consisting of miRs related to different cardiovascular pathophysiologies, was evaluated to predict outcome in the context of prevention. MiR-34a, miR-223, miR-378, miR-499 and miR-133 were determined from peripheral blood by qPCR and combined to a risk panel. As derivation cohort, 178 individuals of the DETECT study, and as validation cohort, 129 individuals of the SHIP study were used in a case-control approach. Overall mortality and cardiovascular events were outcome measures. The Framingham Risk Score(FRS) and the SCORE system were applied as risk classification systems. The identified miR panel was significantly associated with mortality given by a hazard ratio(HR) of 3.0 (95% (CI): 1.09-8.43; p = 0.034) and of 2.9 (95% CI: 1.32-6.33; p = 0.008) after adjusting for the FRS in the derivation cohort. In a validation cohort the miR-panel had a HR of 1.31 (95% CI: 1.03-1.66; p = 0.03) and of 1.29 (95% CI: 1.02-1.64; p = 0.03) in a FRS/SCORE adjusted-model. A FRS/SCORE risk model was significantly improved to predict mortality by the miR panel with continuous net reclassification index of 0.42/0.49 (p = 0.014/0.005). The present miR panel of 5 circulating miRs is able to improve risk stratification in prevention with respect to mortality beyond the FRS or SCORE.
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.