Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36120988›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine2022

Association of fecal and serum microRNA profiles with gastrointestinal cancer and chronic inflammatory enteropathy in dogs.

Janne G Lyngby, Marta Gòdia, Louise Brogaard, Annemarie T Kristensen, Merete Fredholm, Ellen Skancke, Joanna Morris, Nana Dupont, Silke Salavati Schmitz, David Argyle and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study, Veterinary
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review of Molecular Technologies for Investigating Canine Cancer.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

14 authors at 7 institutions in 7 countries.

Janne G LyngbyDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0160-743X
Marta GòdiaDepartment of Animal Medicine and Surgery, School of Veterinary Sciences, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Catalonia, Spain.
Louise BrogaardDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4571-6822
Annemarie T KristensenDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3391-4928
Merete FredholmDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3563-7648
Ellen SkanckeDepartment of Companion Animal Clinical Sciences, Norwegian University of the Life Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Joanna MorrisCollege of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5975-2475
Nana DupontDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Silke Salavati SchmitzHospital for Small Animals, Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The Roslin Institute, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush, Midlothian, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1084-7013
David ArgyleHospital for Small Animals, Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The Roslin Institute, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush, Midlothian, United Kingdom.
Armand SánchezDepartment of Animal Medicine and Surgery, School of Veterinary Sciences, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Catalonia, Spain.
Charlotte R BjørnvadDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2876-1667
Susanna CireraDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8105-1579
Lise N NielsenDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3988-0979
University of Copenhagen · DKRoslin Institute · GBUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESFujita Animal Hospital · JPGTx (United States) · USNorwegian University of Life Sciences · NOUniversity of Glasgow · GB

Funding

Fondet for sygdomsbekaempelse hos vore familiedyr ("Fund for Disease Control in our Companion Animals") A5386The Danish Kennel ClubThe Independent Research Fund Denmark - Technology and Production DFF-6111-00124
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReliable biomarkers to differentiate gastrointestinal cancer (GIC) from chronic inflammatory enteropathy (CIE) in dogs are needed. Fecal and serum microRNAs (miRNAs) have been proposed as diagnostic and prognostic markers of GI disease in humans and dogs. HYPOTHESIS/

objectivesDogs with GIC have fecal and serum miRNA profiles that differ from those of dogs with CIE.

aims(a) identify miRNAs that differentiate GIC from CIE, (b) use high-throughput reverse transcription quantitative real-time PCR (RT-qPCR) to establish fecal and serum miRNA panels to distinguish GIC from CIE in dogs. ANIMALS: Twenty-four dogs with GIC, 10 dogs with CIE, and 10 healthy dogs, all client-owned.

methodsAn international multicenter observational prospective case-control study. Small RNA sequencing was used to identify fecal and serum miRNAs, and RT-qPCR was used to establish fecal and serum miRNA panels with the potential to distinguish GIC from CIE.

resultsThe best diagnostic performance for distinguishing GIC from CIE was fecal miR-451 (AUC: 0.955, sensitivity: 86.4%, specificity: 100%), miR-223 (AUC: 0.918, sensitivity: 90.9%, specificity: 80%), and miR-27a (AUC: 0.868, sensitivity: 81.8%, specificity: 90%) and serum miR-20b (AUC: 0.905, sensitivity: 90.5%, specificity: 90%), miR-148a-3p (AUC: 0.924, sensitivity: 85.7%, specificity: 90%), and miR-652 (AUC: 0.943, sensitivity: 90.5%, specificity: 90%). Slightly improved diagnostic performance was achieved when combining fecal miR-451 and miR-223 (AUC: 0.973, sensitivity: 95.5%, specificity: 90%). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: When used as part of a diagnostic RT-qPCR panel, the abovementioned miRNAs have the potential to function as noninvasive biomarkers for the differentiation of GIC and CIE in dogs.

Indexed as

Dog DiseasesGastrointestinal NeoplasmsMicroRNAsAnimalsBiomarkers, TumorCase-Control StudiesDogsGene Expression ProfilingReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionBiomarkers, TumorMicroRNAsbiomarkerCIEmiRNA qPCRneoplasiaRT-qPCRsmall RNA sequencing

Identifiers

PMID36120988
PMCPMC9708456
OpenAlexW4296328935

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.