MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096319392 · doi:10.1002/jcla.23575

Circular RNA profiling facilitates the diagnosis and prognostic monitoring of breast cancer: A pair‐wise meta‐analysis

2020· review· en· W3096319392 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCircular RNAs in diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerHazard ratioCircular RNAInternal medicineOncologyMedicineCancerBiologymicroRNAGeneGeneticsConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: As circular RNAs (circRNAs) have been found to significantly involve in the onset and progression of multiple malignant tumors including breast cancer (BC), this study aims at evaluating the diagnostic and prognostic values of circRNAs in this malady. METHODS: Available databases were thoroughly searched to collect studies on the diagnosis and/or prognosis of BC using circRNA profiling. The updated Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool and the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) were used to assess the underlying bias of included studies. Clinical characteristics of the studies were merged by the quantitative-weighted integral method to obtain the combined effects. RESULTS: Sixteen studies were included, comprising 2438 BC cases and 271 noncancerous controls. The expression signature covered 24 circRNAs (down-regulated: circ-VRK1, hsa_circ_0068033, hsa_circ_103110, hsa_circ_104689, and hsa_circ_104821; up-regulated: circAGFG1, hsa_circ_0001785, hsa_circ_0108942, hsa_circ_0001785, hsa_circ_006054, hsa_circ_100219, hsa_circ_406697, circEPSTI1, circANKS1B, circGFRA1, circ_0103552, CDR1-AS, has_circ_001569, hsa_circ_001783, circFBXL5, circ_0005230, circAGFG1, circ-UBAP2, and circ_0006528). The sensitivity and specificity of circRNAs in distinguishing BC patients from noncancerous controls were 0.65 and 0.68, and the corresponding area under the curve was 0.66. Survival analysis revealed that patients showing highly expressed oncogenic circRNAs were associated with increased mortality risks of BC in overall survival (univariate analysis: hazard ratio [HR] = 3.30, P = .000; multivariate analysis: HR = 3.07, P = .000), and disease-free survival (HR = 8.26, P = .000). Stratified analysis based on circRNA expression status and control type also showed robust results. CONCLUSIONS: Circular RNA profiling presents prominent diagnostic and prognostic values in BC, and can be rated as a promising tool facilitating its early diagnosis and survival.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.010
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it