Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Purpose
Circulating miR-31 was found to be associated with cancers detection and prognosis. The present meta-analysis aimed to explore the effect of circulating miR-31 on cancer detection and prognosis.Method
The studies were accessed using multiple databases. RevMan5.3, Meta-DiSc 1.4, and STATA14.0 were used to estimate the pooled effects, heterogeneity among studies, and publication bias.Results
A total of 14 studies with 1397 cancer patients and 1039 controls were included. For the 12 prognostic tests, the adjusted pooled-AUC was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73-0.86) as the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odd ratio (DOR) from 10 tests was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.76-0.82), 0.79 (95% CI: 0.76-0.82), 3.81 (95% CI: 2.90-5.01), 0.26 (95% CI: 0.20-0.35), and 16.81 (95% CI: 9.67-29.25), respectively. For the 5 prognosis analyses, the pooled HR (hazard ratio) of overall survival (OS) was 1.55 (95% CI 1.30-1.86) for high versus low circulating miR-31 expression. However, high expression of circulating miR-31 did not significantly increase the risk of poor differentiation (pooled OR=1.39, 95% CI: 0.56-3.47) and LNM (pooled OR=3.46, 95% CI: 0.96-12.42) in lung cancer.Conclusion
Circulating miR-31 is an effective biomarker and could be used as a component of miRs signature for cancer detection and prognosis surveillance.
SUBMITTER: Ma Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5438681 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Ma Yingjun Y Chen Yunfang Y Lin Jinbo J Liu Yi Y Luo Kai K Cao Yong Y Wang Tieqiang T Jin Hongwei H Su Zhan Z Wu Haolin H Chen Xiaoliang X Cheng Jinquan J
Oncotarget 20170401 17
<h4>Purpose</h4>Circulating miR-31 was found to be associated with cancers detection and prognosis. The present meta-analysis aimed to explore the effect of circulating miR-31 on cancer detection and prognosis.<h4>Method</h4>The studies were accessed using multiple databases. RevMan5.3, Meta-DiSc 1.4, and STATA14.0 were used to estimate the pooled effects, heterogeneity among studies, and publication bias.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 14 studies with 1397 cancer patients and 1039 controls were incl ...[more]