Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35764858›Full record

SynthesisReproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)2023

Circulating microRNAs as Potential Biomarkers for the Diagnosis of Endometrial Cancer: a Meta-Analysis.

Jie Gao, Ya-Zhou Fan, Shuai-Shuai Gao, Wen-Ting Zhang

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. A Potential Regulatory Network of Selected Human Erythrocytic miRNAs withMicroRNA (Shariqah, United Arab Emirates) · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. circRNAs in Endometrial Cancer-A Promising Biomarker: State of the Art.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Jie GaoWuhai Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Wuhai, Inner Mongolia, China.
Ya-Zhou FanThe Mongolian Medicine and Traditional, Chinese Medicine Hospital of Wuhai, Wuhai, Inner Mongolia, China.
Shuai-Shuai GaoXi'an Daxing Hospital, Shaanxi, China.
Wen-Ting ZhangXi'an Daxing Hospital, Shaanxi, China. wenting2818@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-4166-9352
First Hospital of Xi'an · CNInner Mongolia Autonomous Region Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNUniversidad de Sevilla · ESWeihai Maternal and Child Health Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common female genital tract malignancy worldwide. Many investigators have confirmed the possibility of using circulating miRNAs to diagnose EC; however, the results were inconsistent. Therefore, we performed the current meta-analysis to systematically evaluate the diagnostic value of circulating miRNAs in EC. We carefully searched relevant articles published prior to February 15, 2022 in the databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Wanfang database, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) based on PRISMA statement. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated to test the diagnostic accuracy. Furthermore, subgroup analyses were performed to identify the potential sources of heterogeneity, and the Deeks' funnel plot asymmetry test was used to evaluate the potential publication bias. Twenty-one studies from 12 articles including a total of 2305 participants (1341 EC patients and 964 controls) were included in the current diagnostic meta-analysis. The overall pooled results of miRNA for EC diagnosis were: sensitivity, 0.84 (95% CI: 0.79-0.88); specificity, 0.87 (95% CI: 0.79-0.91); PLR, 6.3 (95% CI: 3.9-10.0); NLR, 0.18 (95% CI: 0.13-0.25); DOR, 35 (95% CI: 17-71); and AUC was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.89-0.94). Subgroup analysis suggested that miRNA cluster, serum type, and large sample sizes showed a better diagnostic accuracy. Moreover, there was no significant publication bias. Circulating miRNAs have great potential as novel non-invasive biomarkers for EC diagnosis.

Indexed as

Circulating MicroRNAEndometrial NeoplasmsGenital Neoplasms, FemaleMicroRNAsBiomarkersBiomarkers, TumorFemaleHumansSensitivity and SpecificityBiomarkersBiomarkers, TumorCirculating MicroRNAMicroRNAsEndometrial cancerMeta-analysisMicroRNA, Diagnosis

Identifiers

PMID35764858
OpenAlexW4283690534

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.