ArticleCancer management and research2019
MicroRNA-21 and microRNA-30c as diagnostic biomarkers for prostate cancer: a meta-analysis.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- The promising role of new molecular biomarkers in prostate cancer: from coding and non-coding genes to artificial intelligence approaches.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of the prognostic significance of microRNAs related to metastatic and EMT process among prostate cancer patients.Journal of translational medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Role of Specific miRNA Expression and Nuclear Kappa B Gene Polymorphism as Potential Diagnostic Markers for Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2026Article
- Diagnostic value of miR‑21 and miR‑221 as potential biomarkers for early diagnosis of prostate cancer.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2025Article
- miRNA Expression Patterns in Early- and Late-Stage Prostate Cancer Patients: High-Throughput Analysis.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- miRNA-21 as High Potential Prostate Cancer Biomarker in Prostate Cancer Patients in Indonesia.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2023Article
- Deciphering the Role of microRNA Mediated Regulation of Coronin 1C in Glioblastoma Development and Metastasis.Non-coding RNA · 2023Article
- Chimeric nanocomposites for the rapid and simple isolation of urinary extracellular vesicles.Journal of extracellular vesicles · 2022Article
- Personalized management of prostate cancer: from molecular and imaging markers to radiogenomics.Polish journal of radiology · 2022Review
- CASC11 promotes aggressiveness of prostate cancer cells through miR-145/IGF1R axis.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2021Article
- Lifetime Impact of Cow's Milk on Overactivation of mTORC1: From Fetal to Childhood Overgrowth, Acne, Diabetes, Cancers, and Neurodegeneration.Biomolecules · 2021Review
- Review
- Micro RNA Sensing with Green Emitting Silver Nanoclusters.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Upregulated Wnt-11 and miR-21 Expression Trigger Epithelial Mesenchymal Transition in Aggressive Prostate Cancer Cells.Biology · 2020Article
- The role of MiRNA-21 in gliomas: Hope for a novel therapeutic intervention?Toxicology reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer (PCa) is the second leading cause of cancer death in men. Several articles have reported that microRNA-21 (miR-21) and microRNA-30c (miR-30c) have diagnostic values for PCa, but the results are inconclusive. In order to precisely assess the diagnostic values of miR-21 and miR-30c for PCa, this meta-analysis is performed.
methodsArticles were searched in the databases of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Knowledge (search date: September 6, 2018). Studies were included if they were designed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of miR-21 or miR-30c for PCa. Using Stata 12.0 and Meta-Disc 1.4, the pooled sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under curve (AUC) of the summary receiver-operating characteristic (SROC) curve with the corresponding 95% CI were calculated.
resultsOverall, ten studies (six studies for miR-21 and four for miR-30c) involving1,371 participants were included in this meta-analysis. For miR-21, the pooled SEN and SPE were, respectively, 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87-0.94) and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.82-0.93), the pooled PLR and NLR were, respectively, 7.74 (95% CI: 4.81-12.47), 0.1 (95% CI: 0.06-0.15), the DOR was 77.64 (95% CI: 34.64-174.02), AUC of SROC was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93-0.97). For miR-30c, the pooled SEN and SPE were, respectively, 0.74 (95% CI: 0.65-0.81) and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.72-0.83), the pooled PLR and NLR were, respectively, 3.39 (95% CI: 2.69-4.26), and 0.34 (95% CI: 0.26-0.44), the DOR was 10.06 (95% CI: 6.96-14.55), and AUC of SROC was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.79-0.86).
conclusionFor PCa, miR-21 is a good diagnostic biomarker and miR-30c is a moderate diagnostic biomarker.
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.