ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2021
Quantitative assessment of the diagnostic role of mucin family members in pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of mucin family members with prognostic significance in pancreatic cancer patients: A meta-analysis.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- Catching pancreatic cancer early: Are we there yet?Journal of the National Cancer Center · 2026Review
- Aptamer Engineering: Strategies for Discovering Functional Nucleic Acids for Next-Generation Diagnostics and Biosensing.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Emerging Tumor Biomarkers in Pancreatic Cancer and Their Clinical Implications.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025Review
- Leveraging glycosylation for early detection and therapeutic target discovery in pancreatic cancer.Cell death & disease · 2025Review
- The Past, Present, and Future of Biomarkers for the Early Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cancer.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Plasma extracellular vesicles proteomics in meningioma patients.Translational oncology · 2024Article
- Activation of Vitamin D/VDR Signaling Reverses Gemcitabine Resistance of Pancreatic Cancer Cells Through Inhibition of MUC1 Expression.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2023Article
- Review
- Genome-wide analysis of Chinese keloid patients identifies novel causative genes.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Application of Proteomics in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Biomarker Investigations: A Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Biomarkers in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer: Are we closer to finding the golden ticket?World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
- MUC1: Structure, Function, and Clinic Application in Epithelial Cancers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of mucins (MUC) as specific biomarkers for various malignancies has recently emerged. MUC1, MUC4, MUC5AC, and MUC16 can be detected at different stages of pancreatic cancer (PC), and can be valuable for indicating the initiation and progression of this disease. However, the diagnostic significance of the mucin family in patients with PC remains disputed. Herein, we assessed the diagnostic accuracy of mucins in PC using a meta-analysis.
methodsWe searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Web of Science, Embase, and Chinese databases from their date of inception to June 1, 2020 to identify studies assessing the diagnostic performance of mucins in PC. The estimations of diagnostic indicators in selected studies were extracted for further analysis by Meta-DiSc software. Publication bias was assessed using Deeks' funnel plot asymmetry test.
resultsOur meta-analysis included 34 studies. The pooled accuracy indicators of MUC1 in PC including the sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) (with 95% confidence intervals) were 0.84 (0.82-0.86), 0.60 (0.56-0.64), 18.37 (9.18-36.78), 2.62 (1.79-3.86), and 0.22 (0.15-0.33), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.8875 and the Q index was 0.8181. Quantitative random-effects meta-analysis of MUC4 in PC using the summary (ROC) curve model revealed a pooled sensitivity of 0.86 (95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.89) and specificity of 0.88 (95% confidence interval, 0.85-0.91). In addition, the meta-analysis of MUC5AC in PC diagnosis also showed a high sensitivity and specificity of 0.71 (95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.76) and 0.60 (95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.66), respectively. Regarding MUC16, the area under the summary ROC curve and Q index were 0.9185 and 0.8516, respectively.
conclusionsIn summary, our results suggested a good diagnostic accuracy of several crucial mucins in PC. Mucins may serve as optional indicators in PC examination, and further research is warranted to investigate the role of mucins as potential clinical biomarkers.
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.