ReviewDiscover oncology2024
Circulating micrornas as potential diagnostic biomarkers for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Discover oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Routine Blood-Based Parameters Associated with Invasive Cervical Cancer Versus High-Grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia: Development of a Retrospective Diagnostic Prediction Model.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- MicroRNA Dysregulation in HPV-Driven Cervical Cancer: A Review of Oncoprotein-Targeted Signaling Pathways.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- The TFRC as a prognostic biomarker and potential therapeutic target in cervical cancer: a preliminary study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCervical cancer is a prevalent malignancy of the female reproductive system. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) is a precursor lesion for CC. Various studies have examined circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) as potential early diagnostic markers for CC and CIN. However, the findings have been inconclusive. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and identify potential sources of variability among these studies.
methodsThe PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify relevant literature. Then, Stata 14.0 was utilized to calculate summary estimates for diagnostic parameters, including sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC). To scrutinize the heterogeneity, the Cochran-Q test and I
resultsWe analysed 12 articles reporting on 24 studies involving 1817 patients and 1731 healthy controls. The pooled sensitivity was 0.77 (95% CI 0.73-0.81), the specificity was 0.81 (95% CI 0.73-0.86), the PLR was 3.99 (95% CI 2.81-5.65), the NLR was 0.28 (95% CI 0.23-0.35), the DOR was 14.18 (95% CI 8.47-23.73), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.85 (95% CI 0.81-0.87). Subgroup analysis revealed that multiple miRNAs can improve diagnostic performance; the pooled sensitivity of multiple miRNAs was 0.78 (95% CI 0.68-0.86), the specificity was 0.85 (95% CI 0.78-0.90), and the AUC was 0.89 (95% CI 0.86-0.91).
conclusionThis study suggested that circulating microRNAs may be biomarkers for early CC diagnosis.
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.