MiR-486 as an effective biomarker in cancer diagnosis and prognosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Min Jiang _, Xuelian Li, Xiaowei Quan, Xianglin Yang, Chang Zheng, Xia Hao, Ruoyi Qu and Baosen Zhou

PDF  |  HTML  |  How to cite  |  Order a Reprint

Oncotarget. 2018; 9:13948-13958. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.24189

Metrics: PDF 660 views  |   HTML 851 views  |   ?  


Min Jiang1,2, Xuelian Li1,2, Xiaowei Quan1,2, Xianglin Yang1,2, Chang Zheng1,2, Xia Hao1,2, Ruoyi Qu1,2 and Baosen Zhou1,2,3

1Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, China Medical University, Shenyang, China

2Key Laboratory of Cancer Etiology and Prevention (China Medical University), Liaoning Province Department of Education, Shenyang, China

3Department of Clinical Epidemiology, First Affiliated Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, China

Correspondence to:

Baosen Zhou, email: bszhou@mail.cmu.edu.cn

Keywords: miR-486; cancer; meta-analysis; diagnostic; prognosis

Received: October 20, 2017     Accepted: December 05, 2017     Published: January 12, 2018


Purpose: MiR-486 was found to be associated with cancer’s diagnosis and prognosis. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the potential effect of miR-486 on cancer detection and prognosis.

Materials and Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang databases to find all correlated articles. The STATA 11.0 was applied to estimate the pooled effects, heterogeneity and publication bias.

Results: The pooled sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE) and Area under the curve (AUC) were 82% (95% CI: 78–85%), 88% (95% CI: 83–92%) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.88–0.93). Subgroup analysis indicated miR-486 from circulating samples exhibited higher diagnostic accuracy with the AUC was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.87–0.92) than miR-486 from other specimen with the AUC of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.75–0.82) and miR-486 obtained a better diagnostic value in the Asian population with the AUC of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91–0.95) than the Caucasian and Caucasian/African population with the AUC of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.76–0.83) and 0.89 (95% CI: 0.86–0.91) respectively. MiR-486 obtained high value for the diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer with SEN, SPE and AUC were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.0.77–0.87), 0.90 (95% CI: 0.84–0.94) as well as 0.92 (95% CI: 0.89–0.94) respectively. For the 7 prognostic tests, the pooled hazard ratio (HR) was 0.48 (95% CI: –0.13–1.08) for low versus high miR-486 expression.

Conclusions: This meta-analysis indicated that miR-486 can be used as ideal biomarkers in the cancer’s diagnosis. However, Low miR-486 expression did not increase the risk of poor outcome.

Creative Commons License All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
PII: 24189