MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196592039 · doi:10.3390/cancers13174369

A Clinical Update on the Prognostic Effect of microRNA Biomarkers for Survival Outcome in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W3196592039 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Shaw, Raghul Senthilnathan, Sunil Krishnan, Deepa Suresh, Sameep Shetty, Gothandam Kodiveri Muthukaliannan, Ravishankar Ram Mani, Palanisamy Sivanandy, Harish C. Chandramoorthy, Madan M. Gupta, Siddhartha Baxi, Rama Jayaraj

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicroRNA in disease regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFunnel plotMeta-analysisNasopharyngeal carcinomaHazard ratioPublication biasMedicineOncologyInternal medicineConfidence intervalSystematic reviewMalignancyBiomarkerStage (stratigraphy)MEDLINEBioinformaticsBiologyRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), a relatively uncommon malignancy in the Western world, is highly prevalent in Southeast Asia where the treatment outcomes are poor. Despite recent improvements in diagnosis and treatment locoregional control, distant metastasis and chemoresistance continue to be a significant cause of mortality. Identification of a reliable and comprehensive prognostic biomarker is highly desirable. The potential relevance of microRNAs (miRNAs) as prognostic markers in NPC is assessed in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic review was performed using the PubMed and Science Direct databases. The search was limited to search results between 2018 and 2020 with the keywords and search strings developed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The recovered articles were carefully screened based on the selection criteria. In the meta-analysis study, high and low expression levels of miRNAs were measured using the hazard ratio (HR) and 95 percent confidence interval (CI) for patients’ survival outcomes. Egger’s bias indicator test and funnel plot symmetry were used to assess the risk of bias. Results: Amongst the 25 studies, 13 fulfilled the conditions of inclusion in this meta-analysis. The researchers further delved into the 21 miRNA expression levels from 3015 NPC patients to ascertain a link between miRNA’s predictive role and survival outcomes. The majority of the articles retrieved during this study were from China, with two studies from Canada and Malaysia. The overall pooled effect size estimation (HR) for dysregulated miRNAs was 1.590 (95% CI: 1.253–2.017), displaying that miRNA marker expression increased the risk of mortality in NPC patients by 59%. Conclusions: This meta-analysis is novel and looks at the prognostic significance of miRNAs as biomarkers in NPC patients using a continuous version pooled meta-analysis. Although our findings are ambiguous, they do show that greater miRNA expression in NPC may be associated with a lower overall survival rate. To acquire clear conclusions, more prospective studies with large cohorts are required to determine the clinical utility of miRNAs as prognostic biomarkers.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.028
Bibliometrics0.0110.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicMicroRNA in disease regulationFrench-language works237,207