| Literature DB >> 31413763 |
Yizhong Peng1, Donghua Huang2, Xiangcheng Qing1, Lu Tang3, Zengwu Shao1.
Abstract
Background: MiR-92a has been discovered to be involved in the malignant behavior of various types of cancers. However, the particular clinical and prognostic roles of miR-92a in tumors still need to be identified more precisely. The current meta-analysis assessed the prognostic value of miR-92a in various carcinomas.Entities:
Keywords: cancer.; clinical characteristics; meta-analysis; miR-92a; prognosis
Year: 2019 PMID: 31413763 PMCID: PMC6691717 DOI: 10.7150/jca.30313
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cancer ISSN: 1837-9664 Impact factor: 4.207
Figure 1Flow chart of the meta-analysis
Figure 2Association between miR-92a expression levels and (A) overall survival and (B) overall survival without the outliers as well as corresponding (C) sensitivity analysis and (D) publication bias evaluation
Association between miR-92a expression levels and overall survivals
| No. of studies | No. of patients | Pooled HR(95%CI) | Meta regression | Heterogeneity | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fixed | Random | p-value# | p-value* | I2 | p-value | |||||
| 16 | 1944 | 2.18(1.87,2.53) | 2.14(1.57,2.92) | 72.40% | 0.000 | |||||
| 0.184 | 0.174 | |||||||||
| Chinese | 15 | 1856 | 2.35(2.02,2.74) | 2.41(1.91,3.04) | 47.80% | 0.020 | ||||
| Greek | 1 | 88 | 0.28(0.13,0.61) | 0.28(0.13,0.61) | - | - | ||||
| 0.723 | 0.932 | |||||||||
| <100 | 8 | 592 | 1.90(1.45,2.49) | 1.83(1.05,3.20) | 76.10% | 0.000 | ||||
| ≥100 | 8 | 1352 | 2.32(1.93,2.77) | 2.43(1.68,3.54) | 70.40% | 0.001 | ||||
| 0.691 | 0.547 | |||||||||
| <8 | 8 | 1023 | 1.88(1.54,2.29) | 1.76(1.09,2.84) | 79.90% | 0.000 | ||||
| ≥8 | 8 | 921 | 2.67(2.12,3.36) | 2.64(1.83,3.83) | 51.10% | 0.046 | ||||
| 0.154 | 0.158 | |||||||||
| tissues | 12 | 1161 | 2.43(1.99,2.96) | 2.43(1.99,2.96) | 0.00% | 0.713 | ||||
| blood | 4 | 783 | 1.88(1.49,2.36) | 1.81(0.68,4.82) | 93.10% | 0.000 | ||||
| 0.574 | - | |||||||||
| Gastrointestinal cancer | 8 | 1197 | 2.24(1.83,2.75) | 2.50(1.65,3.79) | 69.50% | 0.002 | ||||
| Non-gastrointestinal cancer | 8 | 747 | 2.10(1.69,2.63) | 1.81(1.09,3.00) | 77.60% | 0.000 | ||||
| - | 0.442 | |||||||||
| Hematological cancer | 1 | 88 | 0.28(0.13,0.61) | 0.28(0.13,0.61) | - | - | ||||
| Non-hematological cancer | 15 | 1856 | 2.35(2.02,2.74) | 2.41(1.91,3.04) | 47.80% | 0.020 | ||||
| - | - | |||||||||
| esophageal squamous cell carcinoma | 2 | 170 | 1.82(1.07,3.10) | 1.78(0.72,4.41) | 65.30% | 0.090 | ||||
| osteosarcoma | 2 | 131 | 2.49(1.38,4.48) | 2.54(1.26,5.12) | 28.40% | 0.237 | ||||
| colorectal cancer | 4 | 514 | 3.45(2.28,5.24) | 3.67(1.87,7.20) | 56.40% | 0.076 | ||||
| non-small cell lung cancer | 2 | 246 | 2.65(1.90,3.70) | 2.33(1.21,4.51) | 40.80% | 0.194 | ||||
| chronic lymphocytic leukemia | 1 | 88 | 0.28(0.13,0.61) | 0.28(0.13,0.61) | - | - | ||||
| gastric cancer | 2 | 513 | 1.99(1.53,2.58) | 2.03(0.98,4.18) | 86.90% | 0.006 | ||||
| hepatocellular carcinoma | 2 | 196 | 2.40(1.56,3.72) | 2.40(1.56,3.72) | 0.00% | 0.866 | ||||
| nasopharyngeal carcinoma | 1 | 86 | 2.17(1.00,4.72) | 2,17(1.00,4.72) | - | - | ||||
Abbreviations: 95%CI, 95% confidence interval; Fixed, fixed pooling model; Random, random pooling model; HR, hazard ratio; NOS, Newcastle-Ottawa scale scores; #, the covariates for meta-regression are population, sample size, NOS scores, specimen, tumor category 1; *, the covariates for meta-regression are population, sample size, NOS scores, specimen, tumor category 2.
Figure 3Subgroup analyses of (A) population (Chinese and Greek), (B) sample sizes (<100 and ≥100), (C) NOS scores (<8 and ≥8), (D) specimen (tissues and blood), (E) tumor category (gastrointestinal cancer and non-gastrointestinal cancer), (F) tumor category (hematological cancer and non-hematological cancer) for overall survival
Figure 4The independent role of miR-92a as a prognostic indicator for (A) overall survival, (B) overall survival without outliers, and (C) sensitivity analysis, (D) publication bias evaluation
Meta-analysis of miR-92a as an independent prognostic indicator for Chinese patients of various carcinomas
| No. of studies | No. of patients | Pooled HR(95%CI) | Meta regression | Heterogeneity | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fixed | Random | p-value | I2 | p-value | |||||
| 8 | 1214 | 2.02(1.66,2.46) | 2.10(1.65,2.67) | 25.50% | 0.225 | ||||
| 0.097 | |||||||||
| <100 | 3 | 233 | 2.13(1.46,3.11) | 2.13(1.46,3.11) | 0.00% | 0.945 | |||
| ≥100 | 5 | 981 | 1.99(1.58,2.50) | 2.21(1.50,3.25) | 56.50% | 0.057 | |||
| 0.091 | |||||||||
| <8 | 3 | 619 | 1.75(1.28,2.38) | 2.03(1.12,3.67) | 66.20% | 0.052 | |||
| ≥8 | 5 | 595 | 2.23(1.73,2.89) | 2.23(1.73,2.89) | 0.00% | 0.728 | |||
| 0.079 | |||||||||
| tissues | 5 | 519 | 2.35(1.73,3.18) | 2.35(1.73,3.18) | 0.00% | 0.850 | |||
| blood | 3 | 695 | 1.81(1.40,2.35) | 2.00(1.18,3.39) | 68.90% | 0.040 | |||
| 0.290 | |||||||||
| Gastrointestinal cancer | 5 | 826 | 1.94(1.47,2.56) | 2.29(1.44,3.64) | 56.20% | 0.058 | |||
| Non-gastrointestinal cancer | 3 | 388 | 2.11(1.60,2.80) | 2.11(1.60,2.80) | 0.00% | 0.959 | |||
Abbreviations: 95%CI, 95% confidence interval; Fixed, Fixed pooling model; Random, Random pooling model; HR, hazard ratio; NOS: Newcastle-Ottawa scale scores
Association between miR-92a expression levels and other prognostic indicators
| No. of studies | No. of patients | Pooled HR(95%CI) | Heterogeneity | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fixed | Random | I2 | p-value | ||||
| 2 | 295 | 3.17(1.79,5.63) | 3.28(1.68,6.43) | 21.00% | 0.261 | ||
| univariate | 2 | 223 | 1.42(0.91,2.21) | 0.92(0.13,6.43) | 93.30% | 0.000 | |
| multivariate | 2 | 223 | 1.47(0.80,2.69) | 1.20(0.13,11.31) | 92.50% | 0.000 | |
| univariate | 3 | 615 | 1.89(1.54,2.32) | 1.93(1.25,2.97) | 72.60% | 0.026 | |
| multivariate | 3 | 615 | 1.76(1.41,2.19) | 1.85(1.26,2.72) | 61.00% | 0.077 | |
Abbreviations: 95%CI, 95% confidence interval; Fixed, Fixed pooling model; Random, Random pooling model; HR, hazard ratio; NOS, Newcastle-Ottawa scale scores
Overall analysis of miR-92a expression association with clinicopathological characteristics.
| Clinicopathological parameters | No. of studies | No. of patients | Pooled OR (95%CI) | Heterogeneity | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fixed | Random | I2 | p-value | ||||
| Gender (male vs. female) | 10 | 1063 | 0.87(0.64,1.17) | 0.87(0.63,1.20) | 10.40% | 0.347 | |
| Age (≥60 vs <60 years) | 3 | 395 | 1.33(0.83,2.13) | 1.36(0.52,3.55) | 73.10% | 0.024 | |
| Tumor Size (≥5 vs <5 cm) | 3 | 293 | 2.13(1.31,3.45) | 2.13(1.31,3.45) | 0.00% | 0.857 | |
| Lymph node metastasis (present vs. absent) | 5 | 581 | 1.87(1.31,2.69) | 1.91(1.15,3.17) | 47.30% | 0.108 | |
| Distant metastasis (present vs. absent) | 7 | 745 | 2.99(1.77,5.03) | 2.91(1.72,4.92) | 0.00% | 0.823 | |
| TNM stage (III+IV vs. I+II) | 7 | 826 | 2.59(1.88,3.57) | 2.58(1.87,3.56) | 0.00% | 0.874 | |
| Differentiation (poor vs. others) | 5 | 455 | 1.75(1.07,2.85) | 1.75(1.07,2.85) | 0.00% | 0.999 | |
Abbreviations: 95%CI, 95% confidence interval; Fixed, Fixed model; OR, odds ratio; Random, Random model.
Figure 5Association between miR-92a expression level and TNM stages of cancer patients, (A) publication bias evaluation, (B) sensitivity analysis, (C) overall pooling result, (D) pooling result without the outliers.