Literature DB >> 27100733

Response to: Comment on 'Circulating cell-free miRNAs as biomarker for triple-negative breast cancer'.

Vivian Y Shin1, Ava Kwong1,2,3.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27100733      PMCID: PMC4865970          DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2016.2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


× No keyword cloud information.
Without a standardised method in the selection of diagnostic biomarkers, commonly seen in most of the preclinical studies, the use of statistical methods tends to vary between different groups based on the specific aims of the studies. Multivariate regression analysis is a rational way and not an uncommon methodology to evaluate the usefulness of miRNA signature as biomarkers, provided that the risk prediction of selected miRNAs has been taken into account. In one study, five miRNAs including up- and downregulated miRNAs were included in the panel of markers for prediction of recurrence and metastasis in prostate cancer (Nam ). In a recent study on early detection of breast cancer, the authors compared the ROC analysis between individual miRNA and 3-miRNA signature (miR-199a, miR-29c and miR-424); the AUC of 3-miRNA signature was similar to that of miR-199a in terms of sensitivity and specificity (0.905 vs 0.883) (Zhang ). If some of the selected miRNAs in the signature were associated with tumour stage while others not, it is likely that this may create a collinearity in the overall analysis of the miRNA signature (Xiong ). In our case, however, even when miR-16 and miR-21 were differentially expressed between TNBC and non-TNBC, they are independent of tumour stage in the cohort, and combining the three miRNAs did not show a huge improvement, which was expected (Shin ). Coherent with other studies, the miRNA panel did not necessarily yield a significant improvement on AUC as compared with single miRNA (Murray ; Krishnan ). Thus, improvement on biomarker analysis methodologies is awaited to tackle the heterogeneity in biomarker studies (Ray ). In lieu of a single marker, we believe a panel of signature would be a reliable representation for disease discrimination; a standardised analysis of data normalisation and also weighing of individual miRNA in the panel need to be considered. Using blood-based miRNA markers for diagnosis and prognosis will require validation in large-scale prospective and translational studies prior to clinical use.
  7 in total

Review 1.  Statistical evaluation of a biomarker.

Authors:  Patrick Ray; Yannick Le Manach; Bruno Riou; Tim T Houle
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 7.892

2.  A circulating miRNA signature as a diagnostic biomarker for non-invasive early detection of breast cancer.

Authors:  Lei Zhang; Ye Xu; Xingyu Jin; Zengwu Wang; Yidi Wu; Deyao Zhao; Gang Chen; Deyu Li; Xiaoxia Wang; Huiqing Cao; Yuntao Xie; Zicai Liang
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2015-10-17       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  Solid tumors of childhood display specific serum microRNA profiles.

Authors:  Matthew J Murray; Katie L Raby; Harpreet K Saini; Shivani Bailey; Sophie V Wool; Jane M Tunnacliffe; Anton J Enright; James C Nicholson; Nicholas Coleman
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2014-11-21       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Identification and Validation of a Five MicroRNA Signature Predictive of Prostate Cancer Recurrence and Metastasis: A Cohort Study.

Authors:  Robert K Nam; Yutaka Amemiya; Tania Benatar; Christopher J D Wallis; Jessica Stojcic-Bendavid; Stephanie Bacopulos; Christopher Sherman; Linda Sugar; Magda Naeim; Wenyi Yang; Aiguo Zhang; Laurence H Klotz; Steven A Narod; Arun Seth
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 4.207

5.  Circulating cell-free miRNAs as biomarker for triple-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  V Y Shin; J M Siu; I Cheuk; E K O Ng; A Kwong
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 7.640

6.  Next generation sequencing profiling identifies miR-574-3p and miR-660-5p as potential novel prognostic markers for breast cancer.

Authors:  Preethi Krishnan; Sunita Ghosh; Bo Wang; Dongping Li; Ashok Narasimhan; Richard Berendt; Kathryn Graham; John R Mackey; Olga Kovalchuk; Sambasivarao Damaraju
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2015-09-29       Impact factor: 3.969

7.  An integrated mRNA and microRNA expression signature for glioblastoma multiforme prognosis.

Authors:  Jie Xiong; Zhitong Bing; Yanlin Su; Defeng Deng; Xiaoning Peng
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-05-28       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  miRNA Expression Profiles in Luminal A Breast Cancer-Implications in Biology, Prognosis, and Prediction of Response to Hormonal Treatment.

Authors:  Erik Kudela; Marek Samec; Lenka Koklesova; Alena Liskova; Peter Kubatka; Erik Kozubik; Tomas Rokos; Terezia Pribulova; Eva Gabonova; Marek Smolar; Kamil Biringer
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-10-17       Impact factor: 5.923

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.