MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211258314 · doi:10.1002/cam4.3703

Dysregulated circular RNAs as novel biomarkers in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a meta‐analysis

2021· review· en· W3211258314 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chengcheng Guo, Jianqiang Mi, Haike Li, Panke Su, He Nie

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Medicine · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCircular RNAs in diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisMedicineInternal medicineOncologyHazard ratioUnivariate analysisConfidence intervalStage (stratigraphy)Esophageal squamous cell carcinomaCarcinogenesisSubgroup analysisLymph nodeCircular RNACarcinomaBasal cellPathologyCancermicroRNAMultivariate analysisBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Circular RNAs (circRNAs) play critical roles in tumorigenesis, but their clinical efficacy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) still retains controversial. This meta‐analysis aims at evaluating the associations between circRNA expressions and clinicopathologic features as well as the diagnostic and prognostic values of circRNAs in ESCC. Materials & Methods PubMed, EMBASE, and other online databases were systematically searched to collect studies on circRNAs and clinicopathological features, diagnostic, and/or prognostic assessments of ESCC. The quality of included studies was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS‐2) and Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale (NOS) scales. The included studies were quantitatively weighted and merged, and diagnostic indicators, hazard ratios (HRs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. P values were merged by Fisher᾽s method. Sources of heterogeneity were traced using subgroup, sensitivity, and meta‐regression analyses. Results As a result, 12 studies were included, representing 769 ESCC patients. The meta‐analysis showed that abnormal expressions of circRNAs were associated to TNM stage as well as lymph node and distant metastases in ESCC cases. CircRNA was used to distinguish ESCC patients from healthy controls, and the merged sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the curve (AUC) of ESCC were 0.78 (95% CI: 0.74–0.81), 0.79 (95% CI: 0.75–0.83), and 0.86, respectively. The survival analysis showed that upregulated oncogenic circRNA levels in ESCC tissues was associated with the shorter overall survival (OS) of the patients (univariate analysis: HR = 2.25, 95% CI: 1.71–2.95, p = 0.000, I 2 = 0.0%; multivariate analysis: HR = 2.50, 95% CI: 1.61–3.89, p = 0.000, I 2 = 0.0%), while the OS of ESCC patients presenting overexpressions of tumor‐suppressive circRNAs was significantly ameliorated (HR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.20–0.42, p = 0.000, I 2 = 0.0%). The subgroup analyses based on circRNA biofunctions, sample size, and reference gene also revealed robust results. Conclusion CircRNAs can be used as promising molecular biomarkers for the early diagnosis and prognosis monitoring of ESCC.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.648
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer MedicineSame topicCircular RNAs in diseasesFrench-language works237,207