ArticleTranslational oncology2024
Assessment of salivary miRNA, clinical, and demographic characterization in colorectal cancer diagnosis.
Article in Translational oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Can Salivary Biomarkers Serve as Diagnostic and Prognostic Tools for Early Detection in Patients with Colorectal Cancer? A Systematic Review.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025Review
- Emerging role of small RNAs in inflammatory bowel disease and associated colorectal cancer (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimColorectal cancer (CRC), as the third most frequent malignancy in the world, is the fourth major cause of cancer-related mortality. Its early detection contributes significantly to a reduction in mortality. The objective of this case-control research was to analyze the salivary expression of microRNA-29a (miR-29a) and microRNA-92a (miR-92a), and also to consider demographic, clinical, and nutritional habits for differentiation between CRC patients and healthy controls, especially in the early stages.
methodA standard checklist was used to obtain the demographic information, clinical features, and dietary habits of the case and control groups. Samplings of whole unstimulated saliva samples were obtained from 33 healthy persons and 42 CRC patients. Through real-time PCR, statistical analyses, and machine learning analyses, miR-29a and miR-92a salivary expression levels were evaluated.
resultsThe mean salivary expression of miR-92a and miR-29a in CRC patients was significantly higher than in healthy controls (p < 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for miR-92a and miR-29a salivary biomarkers was 0.947 and 0.978, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity values for miR-92a were 95.24 % and 84.85 %, respectively, whereas sensitivity and specificity for miR-29a were equal to 95.20 % and 87.88 %, respectively. Multiple logistic regressions considering demographics, clinical features, and nutritional habits led to values of 95.35 % and 96.88 % as sensitivity and specificity, respectively, and machine learning analysis led to values of 88.89 % and 86.67 % as sensitivity and specificity, respectively.
conclusionCRC could be accurately diagnosed based on miR-92a and miR-29a levels in saliva. Statistical analysis and machine learning might develop cost-effective models for the distinction of CRC using a noninvasive technique.
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.