SynthesisMedicine2020
Prognostic and clinicopathological significance of MicroRNA-153 in human cancers: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differential Expression of miRNAs in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Patients.Molecular neurobiology · 2023Article
- Prognostic and diagnostic values of non-coding RNAs as biomarkers for breast cancer: An umbrella review and pan-cancer analysis.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2023Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral studies have explored the prognostic value of MicroRNA-153 (miR-153) in various cancers, but obtained inconsistent results. Thus, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the prognostic significance of miR-153 for patients with cancer.
methodsEligible studies were identified by searching the online databases Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Medline,and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) up to March 2020. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs and were calculated to clarify the correlation between miR-153 expression and prognosis of different cancers. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CI were selected to appraise the correlation between miR-153 with clinicopathological characteristics of cancer patients.
resultsIn total, 933 patients from 11 articles were enrolled in our meta-analysis. The results revealed that low miR-153 expression was significantly correlated with poor overall survival (OS) (HR = 2.45, 95% CI = 1.66-3.63, P < .001), but not with disease-free survival (DFS) (HR = 1.67, 95% CI = 0.45-6.19, P = .442). Subgroup analysis found that low miR-153 expression was associated with worse OS in the reported directly from articles group (HR = 2.67, 95% CI: 1.32-5.37, P = .006), survival curves group (HR = 2.10, 95% CI: 1.56-2.84, P < .001), digestive system tumor (HR = 2.76, 95% CI: 1.73-4.41, P < .001), and breast cancer (HR = 4.01, 95% CI: 1.46-11.04, P = .007).Moreover, cancer patients with low miR-153 expression were prone to poor tumor differentiation(poor vs well+moderate, OR = 2.41, 95% CI = 1.52-3.82, P < .001), earlier lymph node metastasis (present vs absent, OR = 2.19, 95% CI = 1.12-4.25, P = .021) and earlier distant metastasis (present vs absent,OR = 8.24, 95% CI = 2.93-23.21, P < .001), but not associated with age,gender and TNM stage.
conclusionsThis meta-analysis indicated that low miR-153 expression is associated with poor prognosis. miR-153 may serve as an effective predictive biomarker for tumor prognosis, especially for digestive system tumor and breast 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.