ReviewResearch and reports in urology2019
Circulating blood miRNAs for prostate cancer risk stratification: miRroring the underlying tumor biology with liquid biopsies.
Review in Research and reports in urology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Liquid biopsies in cancer.Molecular biomedicine · 2025Review
- The potential of cell-free and exosomal microRNAs as biomarkers in liquid biopsy in patients with prostate cancer.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2022Review
- MicroRNA Dysregulation in Prostate Cancer.Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Population-Based Comparison of Different Risk Stratification Systems Among Prostate Cancer Patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Review
- microRNAs identified in prostate cancer: Correlative studies on response to ionizing radiation.Molecular cancer · 2020Review
- Differential MicroRNA Signatures in the Pathogenesis of Barrett's Esophagus.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current risk stratification methods for prostate cancer - although they have seen marked improvements over the past decades - are far from perfect. Despite the significant utility of prostate-specific antigen as a biomarker to monitor for disease recurrence, it cannot predict which tumors will recur or recommend the best treatment for patients. Similarly, although biopsies are imperative for diagnosis and staging, they are saddled with limitations and risks. We must move toward a noninvasive biomarker that has predictive and prognostic efficacy. We therefore review the current literature on circulating miRNA biomarkers, apply their use to two significant clinical problems (ie, how limitations of prostate biopsies can impact diagnosis and treatment management, and the need to tailor treatment for a clinically heterogeneous disease), and evaluate how circulating miRNAs have inherent properties that make them ideal liquid biomarkers. We also outline current gaps in knowledge that must be addressed before they can be implemented into routine clinical practice. With further research on their function and validation of their biomarker utility in large prospective cohorts, circulating miRNAs will likely prove to be the liquid biopsies of tomorrow.
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.