ArticleTranslational cancer research2021
A systematic review and meta-analysis of indirect comparison between miRNA and ctDNA in diagnosis of epithelial ovarian cancer.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis of the diagnostic value ofFrontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- The frequency and characterization of ovarian metastasis from nonovarian cancers using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT.BJR open · 2025Article
- Effect of PARP Inhibitor Combined with Bevacizumab on Platinum-Resistant Recurrent Ovarian Epithelial Carcinoma.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2022-04-01Concerns/Issues about Data ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the clinical value of microRNA (miR) and circulating tumor RNA (ctDNA) in the diagnosis of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) by meta-analysis and indirect comparison based on common reference criteria.
methodsThe PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Chinese biology medicine (CBM), China national knowledge infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and Chinese Weipu (VIP) databases were searched by computer. The retrieval time limit was from the date of establishment of the database to September 2020. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted the basic data according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria formulated in advance, and evaluated the literature quality according to the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy research (quadas-2). The Meta disc 1.4 and Stata 12.0 software programs were used for meta-analysis to calculate the combined sensitivity, combined specificity, combined positive likelihood ratio, combined negative likelihood ratio and combined diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). The summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was drawn using Revman 5.3 software, and the stability of the results was evaluated by sensitivity analysis. The publication bias was evaluated by Deek's funnel asymmetric test. The relative diagnostic odds ratio (RDOR) results of indirect comparison between microRNA and ctDNA were obtained using R software.
resultsNineteen articles were included, including a total of 1,351 EOC patients and 1,194 controls. The heterogeneity test showed that there was obvious heterogeneity caused by non-threshold effect. The random effects model was used for meta-analysis of microRNA in the diagnosis of EOC. The results showed that there was no significant difference between microRNA and ctDNA in the accuracy of EOC diagnosis. The asymmetric test of Deek's funnel chart showed that there was no significant publication bias. DISCUSSION: There are some limitations in this study, there is no blind diagnostic test, and the intensity of indirect comparison evidence is lower than that of direct comparison evidence. The accuracy of diagnostic tests and the imperfection of mesh meta-analysis statistical methods. MicroRNA and ctDNA have similar clinical diagnostic value for EOC.
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.