SynthesisTechnology in cancer research & treatment
Small Nucleolar RNAs as Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers in Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Technology in cancer research & treatment. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A method of comprehensive sequencing analysis of the small RNA fragmentome (RiboMarker).RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Assessing the contributions of noncoding RNAs in acute myeloid leukemia.Blood neoplasia · 2026Review
- Article
- Small Nucleolar RNAs: Biological Functions and Diseases.MedComm · 2025Review
- Review
- Non-Coding RNAs and Innate Immune Responses in Cancer.Biomedicines · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSmall nucleolar RNAs (snoRNAs) form clusters within the genome, representing a mysterious category of small non-coding RNAs. Research has demonstrated that aberrant snoRNAs can contribute to the development of various types of cancers. Recent studies have identified snoRNAs as potentially valuable biomarkers for the diagnosis or/and prognosis of cancers. However, there has been a lack of comprehensive reviews on prognostic and diagnostic snoRNAs across different types of cancers.
methodsWe conducted a systematic search of various databases including Google Scholar, Medline, Cochrane, Scopus, PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, Ovid-Medline, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang, and SinoMed with a time frame reception to December 30, 2022. A total of 49 relevant articles were included in our analysis, consisting of 21 articles focusing on diagnostic aspects and 41 articles focusing on prognostic aspects. Pooled odds ratio, 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and hazard ratio (HR) were utilized to evaluate clinical parameters and overall survival (OS), respectively.
resultThe findings indicated that area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.85, 75%, and 80% in cancer, respectively. There was a possibility that snoRNAs had a positive impact on the diagnosis (risk ratio, RR = 2.95, 95% CI: 2.75-3.16,
conclusionThe results strongly suggested that snoRNAs could serve as potential novel indicators for prognosis and diagnosis in cancers. This systematic review followed the guidelines of the Transparent Reporting of Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PROSPERO register: CRD42020209096).
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.