SynthesisBMC cancer2022
Meta-analysis of diagnostic cell-free circulating microRNAs for breast cancer detection.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Identifying MicroRNAs Suitable for Detection of Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review of Discovery Phases Studies on MicroRNA Expression Profiles.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Pooled it
- Comprehensive proteomics and meta-analysis of COVID-19 host response.Nature communications · 2023Pooled it
- The role of circulating MiR-34a-5p and MiR-let7a-5p as a diagnostic tumor markers in breast cancer a cross-sectional analysis.Molecular biology reports · 2026Article
- Circulating MicroRNA in Breast Cancer.Cancers · 2026Review
- Background-Free Nanopore Decoding of microRNA Expression Patterns Using Circular Diagnostic DNA.Analytical chemistry · 2026Article
- Confirmation of previously identified plasma microRNA ratios for breast cancer detection in a nested case-control study within a screening setting.Clinical and translational medicine · 2024Article
- Identification and validation of screening models for breast cancer with 3 serum miRNAs in an 11,349 samples mixed cohort.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2024Article
- Circulating micrornas as potential diagnostic biomarkers for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Discover oncology · 2024Review
- Mapping the function of MicroRNAs as a critical regulator of tumor-immune cell communication in breast cancer and potential treatment strategies.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024Review
- Plasma microRNA ratios associated with breast cancer detection in a nested case-control study from a mammography screening cohort.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Extracellular Vesicles in Breast Cancer: From Biology and Function to Clinical Diagnosis and Therapeutic Management.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Non-Coding RNAs Modulating Estrogen Signaling and Response to Endocrine Therapy in Breast Cancer.Cancers · 2023Review
- Review
- Cancer-Specific miRNAs Extracted from Tissue-Exudative Extracellular Vesicles in Ovarian Clear Cell Carcinoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Addressing the Clinical Feasibility of Adopting Circulating miRNA for Breast Cancer Detection, Monitoring and Management with Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Platforms.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBreast cancer (BC) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer among women. Numerous studies explored cell-free circulating microRNAs as diagnostic biomarkers of BC. As inconsistent and rarely intersecting microRNA panels have been reported thus far, we aim to evaluate the overall diagnostic performance as well as the sources of heterogeneity between studies.
methodsBased on the search of three online search engines performed up to March 21
resultsPooled sensitivity and specificity of 0.85 [0.81-0.88] and 0.83 [0.79-0.87] were obtained, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed a significantly better performance of multiple (sensitivity: 0.90 [0.86-0.93]; specificity: 0.86 [0.80-0.90]) vs single (sensitivity: 0.82 [0.77-0.86], specificity: 0.83 [0.78-0.87]) microRNA panels and a comparable pooled diagnostic performance between studies using serum (sensitivity: 0.87 [0.81-0.91]; specificity: 0.83 [0.78-0.87]) and plasma (sensitivity: 0.83 [0.77-0.87]; specificity: 0.85 [0.78-0.91]) as specimen type. In addition, based on bivariate and univariate analyses, miRNA(s) based on endogenous normalizers tend to have a higher diagnostic performance than miRNA(s) based on exogenous ones. Moreover, a slight tendency of studies to prefer specificity over sensitivity was observed.
conclusionsIn this study the diagnostic ability of circulating microRNAs to diagnose BC was reaffirmed. Nonetheless, some subgroup analyses showed between-study heterogeneity. Finally, lack of standardization and of result reproducibility remain the biggest issues regarding the diagnostic application of circulating cell-free microRNAs.
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.