SynthesisJournal of ovarian research2026
Assessing diagnostic accuracy of circulating microRNAs as biomarkers for ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of ovarian research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Ovarian cancer is one of the deadliest gynecological malignancies, mainly because of its silent development and the lack of effective conventional methods for diagnosis. Because of their extraordinary stability in bio fluids and expression signatures that specifically correlate with tumors, circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) have received much attention as non-invasive diagnostic biomarkers. This meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic value of circulating miRNAs for early ovarian cancer. A systematic literature review was performed in line with PRISMA-DTA guidelines in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science until March 8, 2025. A total of 24 studies were eligible. Pooled diagnostic metrics (sensitivity and specificity, likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR)) were calculated based upon the bivariate random effect model. Summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) curves were generated and subgroup and meta-regression analyses performed to investigate heterogeneity. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the strength of the pooled estimates. The combined sensitivity, specificity and DOR was 0.749 (95% CI: 0.702–0.791), 0.748 (95% CI:0.695–0.794) and 8.403 (95% CI: 6.308–11.194) respectively, which means a moderate-to-high diagnostic efficacy. Screening efficacy of serum-based and PBMC-based tests differed significantly at the DOR of 10.55 being maximum amongst serum assays. Biospecimen and regional differences contributed substantially to heterogeneity. The results were robust according to sensitivity analyses, and there was no obvious publication bias based on Deeks’ test (p = 0.08). Circulating miRNAs, especially serum-based profiles, are highly promising as non-invasive diagnosis in ovarian cancer. Standardization of protocols and prospective validation is necessary for clinical application.
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.