Zebo Huang1, Wenjiao Chen2, Yiping Du3, Qin Guo4, Yong Mao1, Xin Zhou5, Dong Hua6. 1. Department of Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Jiangnan University, 200 Huihe Road, Wuxi, 214062, China. 2. Department of Oncology, The Affiliated Yixing Hospital of Jiangsu University, 75 Tongzhenguan Road, Wuxi, 214200, China. 3. Department of Oncology, The First People's Hospital of Kunshan Affiliated with Jiangsu University, Suzhou, 215300, China. 4. Department of Clinical Laboratory, The Affiliated Hospital of Jiangnan University, 200 Huihe Road, Wuxi, 214062, China. 5. Department of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China. ivorchou1989@126.com. 6. Department of Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Jiangnan University, 200 Huihe Road, Wuxi, 214062, China. huanglixin1123@163.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cancer is a serious public health problem worldwide, and difficulty in early diagnosis has been the chief obstacle to improve the prognosis of patients. Recently, microRNAs (miRNAs) were widely studied to be potential biomarkers for cancer detection. miR-16 is a prevalent but sophisticated one. In the current study, we aimed to assess the diagnostic value of serum miR-16 for cancer detection. METHODS: A total of 1458 cancer patients, containing ten types of cancers, and 1457 non-cancer controls were recruited in this study. qRT-PCR was used for the amplification of miRNAs. In addition, a meta-analysis of reported studies was performed to confirm our findings systematically. RESULTS: Consequently, miR-16 was down-regulated in ESCC, GCA and GNCA patients compared with NCs (all P < 0.001), while up-regulated in PDAC patients (P = 0.001), LAC, LSCC and EEC patients (all P < 0.001). But no significant differences were observed in CRC, EOC and TC patients when compared to NCs (P = 0.747, 0.235 and 0.268, respectively). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of miR-16 in GCA, ESCC, LAC, LSCC, GNCA, PDAC and EEC were 0.881, 0.780, 0.757, 0.693, 0.602, 0.614 and 0.681, respectively. Results of meta-analysis showed that miR-16 achieved an overall pooled sensitivity of 0.72, specificity of 0.79, and AUC of 0.85, suggesting that miR-16 was a promising biomarker in cancer detection. CONCLUSIONS: We provided a comprehensive view of the diagnostic value of serum miR-16 in cancer diagnosis, and confirmed that circulating miR-16 could play an important role in cancer detection.
BACKGROUND:Cancer is a serious public health problem worldwide, and difficulty in early diagnosis has been the chief obstacle to improve the prognosis of patients. Recently, microRNAs (miRNAs) were widely studied to be potential biomarkers for cancer detection. miR-16 is a prevalent but sophisticated one. In the current study, we aimed to assess the diagnostic value of serum miR-16 for cancer detection. METHODS: A total of 1458 cancerpatients, containing ten types of cancers, and 1457 non-cancer controls were recruited in this study. qRT-PCR was used for the amplification of miRNAs. In addition, a meta-analysis of reported studies was performed to confirm our findings systematically. RESULTS: Consequently, miR-16 was down-regulated in ESCC, GCA and GNCA patients compared with NCs (all P < 0.001), while up-regulated in PDAC patients (P = 0.001), LAC, LSCC and EECpatients (all P < 0.001). But no significant differences were observed in CRC, EOC and TC patients when compared to NCs (P = 0.747, 0.235 and 0.268, respectively). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of miR-16 in GCA, ESCC, LAC, LSCC, GNCA, PDAC and EEC were 0.881, 0.780, 0.757, 0.693, 0.602, 0.614 and 0.681, respectively. Results of meta-analysis showed that miR-16 achieved an overall pooled sensitivity of 0.72, specificity of 0.79, and AUC of 0.85, suggesting that miR-16 was a promising biomarker in cancer detection. CONCLUSIONS: We provided a comprehensive view of the diagnostic value of serum miR-16 in cancer diagnosis, and confirmed that circulating miR-16 could play an important role in cancer detection.
Authors: Afina S Glas; Jeroen G Lijmer; Martin H Prins; Gouke J Bonsel; Patrick M M Bossuyt Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: George Adrian Calin; Calin Dan Dumitru; Masayoshi Shimizu; Roberta Bichi; Simona Zupo; Evan Noch; Hansjuerg Aldler; Sashi Rattan; Michael Keating; Kanti Rai; Laura Rassenti; Thomas Kipps; Massimo Negrini; Florencia Bullrich; Carlo M Croce Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2002-11-14 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Amelia Cimmino; George Adrian Calin; Muller Fabbri; Marilena V Iorio; Manuela Ferracin; Masayoshi Shimizu; Sylwia E Wojcik; Rami I Aqeilan; Simona Zupo; Mariella Dono; Laura Rassenti; Hansjuerg Alder; Stefano Volinia; Chang-Gong Liu; Thomas J Kipps; Massimo Negrini; Carlo M Croce Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2005-09-15 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Patrick S Mitchell; Rachael K Parkin; Evan M Kroh; Brian R Fritz; Stacia K Wyman; Era L Pogosova-Agadjanyan; Amelia Peterson; Jennifer Noteboom; Kathy C O'Briant; April Allen; Daniel W Lin; Nicole Urban; Charles W Drescher; Beatrice S Knudsen; Derek L Stirewalt; Robert Gentleman; Robert L Vessella; Peter S Nelson; Daniel B Martin; Muneesh Tewari Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-07-28 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Lin Xia; Dexin Zhang; Rui Du; Yanglin Pan; Lina Zhao; Shiren Sun; Liu Hong; Jie Liu; Daiming Fan Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2008-07-15 Impact factor: 7.396