Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2021 Feb 4:2021:8851035.
doi: 10.1155/2021/8851035. eCollection 2021.

Diagnostic and Prognostic Role of miR-192 in Different Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lili Wang  1 , Yuhan Liu  2 , Chen Lyu  1 , Alexander Buchner  1   2 , Heike Pohla  1   2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Diagnostic and Prognostic Role of miR-192 in Different Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lili Wang et al. Biomed Res Int. .

Abstract

Introduction: It has been shown that miR-192 is abnormally expressed in a variety of cancer types and participates in different kinds of signaling pathways. The role of miR-192 in the diagnosis and prognosis of cancer has not been verified. This article is aimed at exploring the diagnostic and prognostic value of miR-192 through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: A systematic search was performed through PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases up to June 16, 2020. A total of 16 studies were enrolled in the meta-analyses, of which 11 articles were used for diagnostic meta-analysis and 5 articles were used for prognostic meta-analysis. The values of sensitivity and specificity using miR-192 expression as a diagnostic tool were pooled in the diagnostic meta-analysis. The hazard ratios (HRs) of overall survival (OS) with 95 confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted from the studies, and pooled HRs were evaluated in the prognostic meta-analysis. Eleven studies including 667 cancer patients and 514 controls met the eligibility criteria for the diagnostic meta-analysis. Five studies including 166 patients with high miR-192 expression and 236 patients with low miR-192 expression met the eligibility criteria for the prognostic meta-analysis.

Results: The overall diagnostic accuracy was as follows: sensitivity 0.79 (95%CI = 0.75-0.82), specificity 0.74 (95%CI = 0.64-0.82), positive likelihood ratio 3.03 (95%CI = 2.11-4.34), negative likelihood ratio 0.29 (95%CI = 0.23-0.37), diagnostic odds ratio 10.50 (95%CI = 5.89-18.73), and area under the curve ratio (AUC) 0.82 (95%CI = 0.78-0.85). The overall prognostic analysis showed that high expression of miR-192 in patients was associated with positive survival (HR = 0.62, 95%CI : 0.41-0.93, p = 0.020).

Conclusion: Our results revealed that miR-192 was a potential biomarker with good sensitivity and specificity in cancers. Moreover, highly expressed miR-192 predicted a good prognosis for patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this article.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study selection flowchart.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plot of pooled sensitivity and specificity for 11 studies in the diagnostic meta-analysis.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest plot of the positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) for miR-192 in the diagnostic meta-analysis.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest plot of the diagnostic odds ratio for miR-192 in the diagnostic meta-analysis.
Figure 5
Figure 5
SROC curve for miR-192 in the diagnostic meta-analysis. SENS: pooled sensitivity; SPEC: pooled specificity; AUC: area under the curve.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Fagan's nomogram was used to assess the post-test probabilities. LR: likelihood ratio.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Sensitivity analyses: (a) goodness-of-fit; (b) bivariate normality; (c) influence analysis; (d) outlier detection.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Deeks' funnel plot asymmetry test showed that the p value was 0.82 indicating that there was no publication bias.
Figure 9
Figure 9
ROC plane showed the results of sensitivity, specificity, Q test, and I2 result.
Figure 10
Figure 10
Heterogeneity test: (a) the Galbraith radial plot showed that all the studies were in the 95% CI region suggesting no heterogeneity; (b) there was heterogeneity for three studies beyond the middle region in the bivariate boxplot.
Figure 11
Figure 11
Forest plot of pooled HRs for miR-192 in the prognostic meta-analysis.
Figure 12
Figure 12
Begg's funnel plot for the prognostic meta-analysis.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Siegel R. L., Miller K. D., Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2020. CA: a Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2020;70(1):7–30. doi: 10.3322/caac.21590. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sato F., Tsuchiya S., Meltzer S. J., Shimizu K. MicroRNAs and epigenetics. The FEBS Journal. 2011;278(10):1598–1609. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-4658.2011.08089.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Negrini M., Nicoloso M. S., Calin G. A. MicroRNAs and cancer--new paradigms in molecular oncology. Current Opinion in Cell Biology. 2009;21(3):470–479. doi: 10.1016/j.ceb.2009.03.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ghafouri-Fard S., Shoorei H., Taheri M. Role of microRNAs in the development, prognosis and therapeutic response of patients with prostate cancer. Gene. 2020;759:p. 144995. doi: 10.1016/j.gene.2020.144995. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lim L. P., Glasner M. E., Yekta S., Burge C. B., Bartel D. P. Vertebrate microRNA genes. Science. 2003;299(5612):p. 1540. doi: 10.1126/science.1080372. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources