Diagnostic and prognostic value of circulating miR-21 for cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) have been reported to be aberrantly expressed in patients with cancer. Many studies have shown that circulating miRNAs could play potential roles as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers of cancers. The aim of this meta-analysis is to summarize the role of circulating miR-21 as a biomarker in patients with a variety of carcinomas.

Material and methods

Eligible studies were identified and assessed for quality through multiple search strategies. For diagnostic meta-analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of miR-21 in the diagnosis of cancer were pooled using bivariate random-effects approach models. For prognostic meta-analysis, pooled hazard ratios (HRs) of circulating miR-21 for survival were calculated.

Results

A total of 36 studies dealing with various carcinomas were included for the systemic review. Among them, 23 studies were finally enrolled in the global meta-analysis (17 studies for diagnosis and 6 studies for prognosis). For diagnostic meta-analysis, the overall pooled results for sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LRP), negative likelihood ratios (LRN) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 75.7% (95% CI: 67.1%–82.6%), 79.3% (95% CI: 74.2%–83.5%), 3.65 (95% CI: 2.83–4.70), 0.31 (95% CI: 0.22–0.43), and 11.88 (95% CI: 6.99–20.19), respectively. For prognostic meta-analysis, the pooled HR of higher miR-21 expression in circulation was 2.37 (95% CI: 1.83–3.06, P < 0.001), which could significantly predict poorer survival in general carcinomas. Importantly, subgroup analysis suggested that higher expression of miR-21 correlated with worse overall survival (OS) significantly in carcinomas of digestion system (HR, 5.77 [95% CI: 2.65–12.52]).

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that circulating miR-21 may not suitable to be a diagnostic biomarker, but it has a prognostic value in patients with cancer.     

Diagnostic and prognostic value of miR-200 family in breast cancer: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BackgroundBreast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer for women all over the world. Great interests have been paid to discover accurate and noninvasive methods for breast cancer diagnosis and prognosis. Although the diagnostic and prognostic value of microRNA-200 (miRNA- 200, miR-200) family has been revealed in many studies, the results were inconsistent. Thus, this meta-analysis aims to assess the overall value of miRNA-200 family in breast cancer diagnosis and prognosis.MethodRelevant studies were searched from the following databases: PubMed, PMC, EMBASE, and ScienceDirect using key words: ("miRNA-200 family" or "miR-141" or "miR-200a" or "miR-200b" or "miR-200c" or "miR-429") and (“HER2” or “Luminal A” or “Luminal B” or “TNBC”) and ("breast cancers" or "breast carcinoma" or "breast malignancy" or "breast tumor"). The sensitivity, specificity, AUC were then calculated to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of the miR-200 family. As for the prognostic value of the miR-200 family, the pooled hazard ratio (HR) was assessed. Heterogeneity among individual studies was also examined by subgroup analyses.ResultA total of 24 articles were included in the meta-analysis. The diagnostic value of miR-200s in BC was presented by the pooled sensitivity was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.88); the pooled specificity was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.72-0.89); the pooled AUC was 0.931 (95% CI: 0.919-0.942). Besides, expression of miR-200s in metastatic breast cancer has sensitivity, specificity and AUC of 0.70 (95%CI: 0.56-0.81), 0.72 (95%CI: 0.61-0.81), and 0.814 (95%CI: 0.741-0.903), respectively. The meta-analysis then revealed that high expression of miR-200 family corresponded to poor OS (HR: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.03-2.52), poor DFS (HR: 1.55, 95% CI: 0.95-2.56) in BC patients while downregulation of miRNA-200s corresponded to poor OS (HR= 0.84, 95%CI: 0.46-1.63) in TNBC patients and poor OS (HR=0.49; 95%CI: 0.27-0.88) in luminal BC patient.ConclusionThe MiR-200 family has high diagnostic accuracy and can be used as an important biomarker to prognosticate breast cancer.     

Effect of Metformin on Cancer Risk and Treatment Outcome of Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Epidemiological Observational Studies

Background

Laboratory studies have shown the anti-tumor effect of metformin on prostate cancer. However, recent epidemiological studies have yielded inconclusive results.

Methods

We searched PubMed database from the inception to May 30 2014 for studies which assessed the effect of metformin use on cancer risk of prostate cancer, biochemical recurrence (BCR) and all-cause mortality of patients with prostate cancer. The pooled results and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated by random-effect model.

Results

Twenty-one studies were eligible according to the inclusion criteria. Based on the pooled results of available observational studies, metformin use was significantly associated with a decreased cancer risk (14 datasets, 963991 male subjects, odds ratio: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.85–0.97) and BCR (6 datasets, 2953 patients, hazard ratio: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.68–0.98) of prostate cancer. However, the association of metformin use with all-cause mortality of patients with prostate cancer was not significant (5 datasets, 9241 patients, hazard ratio: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.64–1.14).

Conclusion

Results suggest that metformin use appears to be associated with a significant reduction in the cancer risk and BCR of prostate cancer, but not in all-cause mortality of patients with prostate cancer.     

Prognostic Role of microRNA-21 in Colorectal Cancer: a Meta-Analysis

Background

To date, many studies have shown that microRNAs (miRNA) exhibit altered expression in various cancers and may play an important role as prognostic biomarker of cancers. The present meta-analysis summarizes the recent advances in the use of microRNA-21 (miR-21) in the assessment of colorectal cancer and analyzes the prognostic role of miR-21 for survival outcome.

Methodology/Principal Findings

The present meta-analysis was performed by searching PubMed through multiple search strategies. Data were extracted from studies comparing overall survival (OS) in patients with colorectal cancer who showed higher expression of miR-21 than similar patients. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) of miR-21 for survival and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Seven studies with a total of 1174 patients were included this meta-analysis. For overall survival (OS), the pooled hazard ratio (HR) of higher miR-21 expression in colorectal cancer was 1.76 (95% CI: 1.34–2.32, P=0.000). After elimination of heterogeneity, the pooled HR was 2.32 (95% CI: 1.82–2.97, P=0.000), which was found to significantly predict poorer survival. The subgroup analysis suggested that elevated miR-21 level and patients’ survival correlated with III/IV stage (HR=5.35, 95% CI: 3.73–7.66).

Conclusions/Significance

The present findings suggest that high expression of miR-21 might predict poor prognosis in patients with colorectal cancer.     

Evaluation of a New Cryptococcal Antigen Lateral Flow Immunoassay in Serum,Cerebrospinal Fluid and Urine for the Diagnosis of Cryptococcosis: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

BackgroundA new lateral flow immunoassay (LFA) for the detection of cryptococcal antigen was developed.ObjectiveWe aimed to systematically review all relevant studies to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the cryptococcal antigen LFA on serum, CSF and urine specimens.MethodsWe searched public databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Elsevier Science Direct and Cochrane Library for the English-language literature published up to September 2014. We conducted meta-analyses of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR) and diagnostic odds ratios (DOR) and SROC of LFA in serum and CSF, respectively. The sensitivity of LFA in urine was also analyzed. Subgroup analyses were carried out to analyze the potential heterogeneity.Results12 studies were included in this study. The pooled sensitivity and specificity values of LFA in serum were 97.6% (95% CI, 95.6% to 98.9%) and 98.1% (95% CI, 97.4% to 98.6%), respectively. The average PLR of LFA in serum was 43.787 (95% CI, 22.60–84.81) and the NLR was 0.03 (95% CI, 0.01–0.09). The pooled DOR was 2180.30 (95% CI, 868.92–5471.00) and the AUC was 0.9968. The pooled sensitivity and specificity values of LFA in CSF were 98.9% (95% CI, 97.9% to 99.5%) and 98.9% (95% CI, 98.0% to 99.5%), respectively. The average PLR of LFA in serum was 48.83 (95% CI, 21.59–110.40) and the NLR was 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01–0.04). The pooled DOR was 2931.10 (95% CI, 1149.20–7475.90) and the AUC was 0.9974. The pooled sensitivity value of LFA in urine was 85.0% (95% CI, 78.7% to 90.1%)ConclusionsThe study demonstrates a very high accuracy of LFA in serum and CSF for the diagnosis of cryptococcosis in patients at risk. LFA in urine can be a promising sample screening tool for early diagnosis of cryptococcosis.     

Gadoxetic Acid Disodium-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Detection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis

Objective

To determine the accuracy of MR imaging with gadoxetic acid disodium (Gd-EOB-DTPA) for the detection of hepatocelluar carcinoma (HCC).

Materials and Methods

A systematic search was performed in PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database up to March 2013 to identify studies about evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA enhanced MR imaging in patients suspected of having HCC. The data were extracted to perform heterogeneity test and threshold effect test and to calculate sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, predictive value, and areas under summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

Results

From 601 citations, 10 were included in the meta-analysis. The methodological quality of the 10 studies was good. Overall HCC: There was significant heterogeneity in the pooled analysis (I² = 69.4%, P = 0.0005), and the pooled weighted values were determined to be sensitivity: 0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89, 0. 93); specificity: 0.95 (95% CI: 0.94, 0.96); diagnostic odds ratio: 169.94 (95% CI: 108.84, 265.36); positive likelihood ratio: 15.75 (95% CI: 7.45, 33.31); negative likelihood ratio: 0.10 (95% CI: 0.06, 0.15). The AUC was 0.9778. HCC in cirrhosis: The estimates were to be sensitivity: 0.91 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.93); specificity: 0.93 (95% CI: 0.89, 0.95); diagnostic odds ratio: 234.24 (95% CI: 33.47, 1639.25); positive likelihood ratio: 15.08 (95% CI: 2.20, 103.40); negative likelihood ratio: 0.08 (95% CI: 0.03, 0.21). The AUC was 0.9814. ≤20 mm HCC: The AUC was 0.9936. There was no notable publication bias.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis suggests that MR imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA has high diagnostic accuracy for the detection of HCC, especially for ≤20 mm HCC. This technique shows good prospect in diagnosis of HCC.     

Diagnostic Value of Circulating Chromogranin A for Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

In previous decades, chromogranin A (CgA) has been demonstrated to be the most promising biomarker for the diagnosis of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), but its diagnostic value is still controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to estimate the potential diagnostic value of circulating CgA for NETs.

Methods

We collected relevant studies from several electronic databases as well as from reference lists. Diagnostic indices of CgA were pooled with random effects models. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves for the diagnosis of NETs were used to estimate the overall diagnostic efficiency.

Results

Through a search strategy, 13 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. These studies contained 1260 patients with NETs and 967 healthy controls in the total sample. As a result, the overall sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 0.73 (95% CI: 0.71 to 0.76), 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93 to 0.96) and 56.29 (95% CI: 25.27 to 125.38), respectively, while the summary positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) were 14.56 (95% CI: 6.62 to 32.02) and 0.26 (95% CI: 0.18 to 0.38), respectively. In addition, the area under the curve (AUC) of the circulating CgA in the diagnosis of NETs was 0.8962.

Conclusions

These data demonstrate that circulating CgA is an efficient biomarker for the diagnosis of NETs with high sensitivity and specificity, which indicates that it may be helpful for the clinical management of NETs. However, further studies are needed to clarify this issue.     

Prognostic Value of miR-21 in Various Cancers: An Updating Meta-Analysis

Background

Recently, more and more studies investigated the value of microRNA (miRNA) as a diagnostic or prognostic biomarker in various cancers. MiR-21 was found dysregulated in almost all types of cancers. While the prognostic role of miR-21 in many cancers has been studied, the results were not consistent.

Methods

We performed a meta-analysis to investigate the correlation between miR-21 and survival of general cancers by calculating pooled hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results

The pooled results of 63 published studies showed that elevated miR-21 was a predictor for poor survival of general carcinomas, with pooled HR of 1.91 (95%CI: 1.66–2.19) for OS, 1.42 (95% CI: 1.16–1.74) for DFS and 2.2 (95% CI: 1.64–2.96) for RFS/CSS. MiR-21 was also a prognostic biomarker in the patients who received adjuvant therapy, with pooled HR of 2.4 (95%CI: 1.18–4.9) for OS.

Conclusions

Our results showed that miR-21 could act as a significant biomarker in the prognosis of various cancers. Further studies are warranted before the application of the useful biomarker in the clinical.     

Prognostic value of miR-21 for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Elevated levels of miR-21 expression are associated with many cancers, suggesting it may be a promising clinical biomarker. In prostate cancer (PCa), however, there is still no consensus about the usefulness of miR-21 as an indicator of disease progression. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the value of miR-21 expression as a prognostic measurement in PCa patients. Medline (Ovid), EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for relevant publications between 2010 to 2021. Studies exploring the relationship between miR-21 expression, PCa prognosis and clinicopathological factors were selected for review. Those reporting hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were subject to meta-analyses. Fixed-effect models were employed to calculated pooled HRs and 95% CIs. Risk of bias in each study was assessed using QUIPS tool. Certainty of evidence in each meta-analysis was assessed using GRADE guidelines. A total of 64 studies were included in the systematic review. Of these, 11 were eligible for inclusion in meta-analysis. Meta-analyses revealed that high miR-21 expression was associated with poor prognosis: HR = 1.58 (95% CI = 1.19–2.09) for biochemical recurrence, MODERATE certainty; HR = 1.46 (95% CI = 1.06–2.01) for death, VERY LOW certainty; and HR = 1.26 (95% CI = 0.70–2.27) for disease progression, VERY LOW certainty. Qualitative summary revealed elevated miR-21 expression was significantly positively associated with PCa stage, Gleason score and risk groups. This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that elevated levels of miR-21 are associated with poor prognosis in PCa patients. miR-21 expression may therefore be a useful prognostic biomarker in this disease.     

16S Ribosomal Ribonucleic Acid Gene Polymerase Chain Reaction in the Diagnosis of Bloodstream Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ObjectiveWe aim to evaluate the accuracy of the 16S ribosomal ribonucleic acid (rRNA) gene polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test in the diagnosis of bloodstream infections through a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsA computerized literature search was conducted to identify studies that assessed the diagnostic value of 16S rRNA gene PCR test for bloodstream infections. Study quality was assessed using the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for each study. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was used to summarize overall test performance. Statistical analysis was performed in Meta-DiSc 1.4 and Stata/SE 12.0 software.ResultsTwenty-eight studies were included in our meta-analysis. Using random-effect model analysis, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, and DOR were 0.87 (95% CI, 0.85–0.89), 0.94 (95% CI, 0.93–0.95), 12.65 (95% CI, 8.04–19.90), 0.14 (95% CI, 0.08–0.24), and 116.76 (95% CI, 52.02–262.05), respectively. The SROC curve indicated that the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.9690 and the maximum joint sensitivity and specificity (Q*) was 0.9183. In addition, heterogeneity was statistically significant but was not caused by the threshold effect.ConclusionExisting data suggest that 16S rRNA gene PCR test is a practical tool for the rapid screening of sepsis. Further prospective studies are needed to assess the diagnostic value of PCR amplification and DNA microarray hybridization of 16S rRNA gene in the future.     

Hemoglobin A1c for Diagnosis of Postpartum Abnormal Glucose Tolerance among Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Diagnostic Meta-Analysis

Objective

To evaluate the accuracy of glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) for the diagnosis of postpartum abnormal glucose tolerance among women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).

Methods

After a systematic review of related studies, the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and other measures about the accuracy of HbA1c in the diagnosis of postpartum abnormal glucose tolerance were pooled using random-effects models. The summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was used to summarize the overall test performance.

Results

Six studies met our inclusion criteria. The pooled results on SEN, SPE, PLR, NLR, and DOR were 0.36 (95% CI 0.23–0.52), 0.85 (95% CI 0.73–0.92), 2.4 (95% CI 1.6–3.6), 0.75 (95% CI 0.63–0.88) and 3 (95% CI 2–5). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.67 with a Q value of 0.63.

Conclusions

Measurement of HbA1c alone is not a sensitive test to detect abnormal glucose tolerance in women with prior GDM.     

The Role of Prostatitis in Prostate Cancer: Meta-Analysis

Objective

Use systematic review methods to quantify the association between prostatitis and prostate cancer, under both fixed and random effects model.

Evidence Acquisition

Case control studies of prostate cancer with information on prostatitis history. All studies published between 1990-2012, were collected to calculate a pooled odds ratio. Selection criteria: the selection criteria are as follows: human case control studies; published from May 1990 to July 2012; containing number of prostatitis, and prostate cancer cases.

Evidence Synthesis

In total, 20 case control studies were included. A significant association between prostatitis and prostate cancer was found, under both fixed effect model (pooled OR=1.50, 95%CI: 1.39-1.62), and random effects model (OR=1.64, 95%CI: 1.36-1.98). Personal interview based case control studies showed a high level of association (fixed effect model: pooled OR=1.59, 95%CI: 1.47-1.73, random effects model: pooled OR= 1.87, 95%CI: 1.52-2.29), compared with clinical based studies (fixed effect model: pooled OR=1.05, 95%CI: 0.86-1.28, random effects model: pooled OR= 0.98, 95%CI: 0.67-1.45). Additionally, pooled ORs, were calculated for each decade. In a fixed effect model: 1990’s: OR=1.58, 95% CI: 1.35-1.84; 2000’s: OR=1.59, 95% CI: 1.40-1.79; 2010’s: OR=1.37, 95% CI: 1.22-1.56. In a random effects model: 1990’s: OR=1.98, 95% CI: 1.08-3.62; 2000’s: OR=1.64, 95% CI: 1.23-2.19; 2010’s: OR=1.34, 95% CI: 1.03-1.73. Finally a meta-analysis stratified by each country was conducted. In fixed effect models, U.S: pooled OR =1.45, 95%CI: 1.34-1.57; China: pooled OR =4.67, 95%CI: 3.08-7.07; Cuba: pooled OR =1.43, 95%CI: 1.00-2.04; Italy: pooled OR =0.61, 95%CI: 0.13-2.90. In random effects model, U.S: pooled OR=1.50, 95%CI: 1.25-1.80; China: pooled OR =4.67, 95%CI: 3.08-7.07; Cuba: pooled OR =1.43, 95%CI: 1.00-2.04; Italy: pooled OR =0.61, 95%CI: 0.13-2.90.CONCLUSIONS: the present meta-analysis provides the statistical evidence that the association between prostatitis and prostate cancer is significant.     

Diagnostic Value of Mutation-Specific Antibodies for Immunohistochemical Detection of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutations in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Various studies have assessed the diagnostic accuracy of EGFR mutation-specific antibodies in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We performed a meta-analysis of existing data to investigate the diagnostic value of mutation-specific antibodies for detection of EGFR mutations in NSCLC.

Methods

We systematically retrieved relevant studies from PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and Google Scholar. Data from studies that met the inclusion criteria were extracted for further exploration of heterogeneity, including calculation of the average sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and analysis of SROC(summary receiver operating characteristic) curves.

Results

Fifteen studies met our inclusion criteria. A summary of the meta-analysis of the efficacy of the anti-E746-A750 antibody was as follows: sensitivity, 0.60 (95% CI, 0.55–0.64); specificity, 0.98 (95% CI, 0.97–0.98); PLR, 33.50 (95% CI, 13.96–80.39); NLR, 0.39 (95% CI, 0.30–0.51) and DOR, 111.17 (95% CI, 62.22–198.63). A similar meta-analysis was performed for the anti-L858R antibody with results as follows: sensitivity, 0.76 (95% CI, 0.71–0.79); specificity, 0.96 (95% CI, 0.95–0.97); PLR, 24.42 (95% CI, 11.66–51.17); NLR, 0.22 (95% CI, 0.12–0.39) and DOR, 126.66 (95% CI, 54.60–293.82).

Conclusion

Immunohistochemistry alone is sufficient for the detection of EGFR mutations if the result is positive. Molecular-based analyses are necessary only if the anti-E746-A750 antibody results are negative. Immunohistochemistry seems more suitable for clinical screening for EGFR mutations prior to molecular-based analysis.     

Diagnostic Accuracy of Natriuretic Peptides for Heart Failure in Patients with Pleural Effusion: A Systematic Review and Updated Meta-Analysis

Background

Previous studies have reported that natriuretic peptides in the blood and pleural fluid (PF) are effective diagnostic markers for heart failure (HF). These natriuretic peptides include N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), and midregion pro-atrial natriuretic peptide (MR-proANP). This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of blood and PF natriuretic peptides for HF in patients with pleural effusion.

Methods

PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched to identify articles published in English that investigated the diagnostic accuracy of BNP, NT-proBNP, and MR-proANP for HF. The last search was performed on 9 October 2014. The quality of the eligible studies was assessed using the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. The diagnostic performance characteristics (sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of accuracy) were pooled and examined using a bivariate model.

Results

In total, 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis, including 12 studies reporting the diagnostic accuracy of PF NT-proBNP and 4 studies evaluating blood NT-proBNP. The summary estimates of PF NT-proBNP for HF had a diagnostic sensitivity of 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90–0.96), specificity of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.86–0.95), positive likelihood ratio of 10.9 (95% CI: 6.4–18.6), negative likelihood ratio of 0.07 (95% CI: 0.04–0.12), and diagnostic odds ratio of 157 (95% CI: 57–430). The overall sensitivity of blood NT-proBNP for diagnosis of HF was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.86–0.95), with a specificity of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.77–0.94), positive likelihood ratio of 7.8 (95% CI: 3.7–16.3), negative likelihood ratio of 0.10 (95% CI: 0.06–0.16), and diagnostic odds ratio of 81 (95% CI: 27–241). The diagnostic accuracy of PF MR-proANP and blood and PF BNP was not analyzed due to the small number of related studies.

Conclusions

BNP, NT-proBNP, and MR-proANP, either in blood or PF, are effective tools for diagnosis of HF. Additional studies are needed to rigorously evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of PF and blood MR-proANP and BNP for the diagnosis of HF.     

Genetic variants in the microRNA machinery gene GEMIN4 are associated with risk of prostate cancer: a case-control study of the Chinese Han population

Single-nucleotide polymorphisms located in the microRNA biogenesis pathway could alter the risk for developing prostate cancer. The present study was intended to identify common genetic variants responsible for prostate cancer susceptibility in the GEMIN4 gene. The high-resolution melting method was used to genotype seven polymorphisms (rs7813, rs4968104, rs3744741, rs2740348, rs1062923, rs910925, and rs910924) in the GEMIN4 gene in 300 prostate cancer patients and 244 matched controls. The encouraging discovery in this study was in the rs2740348. Patients carrying the variant heterozygote GC genotype in the rs2740348 were at a 36% decreased risk of prostate cancer (odds ratio [OR] = 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.42, 0.99). Similarly, this variant allele carrier showed significant risk for prostate cancer (OR = 0.64). In addition, subjects carrying the homozygote TT genotype in the rs7813 had a significantly increased risk of prostate cancer (OR = 2.53, 95% CI = 1.07, 6.28). Two common haplotypes were found to be associated with decreased risk of prostate cancer. In the subgroup analysis, higher risk of more severity of prostate cancer (clinical stage III and IV) was observed in individuals with the rs7813 TT genotype (OR = 2.64, 95% CI = 1.02, 7.64), while lower risk of more severity of prostate cancer was observed in individuals with the rs3744741 T allele (OR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.50, 0.96). Overall, our study provides substantial support for the association between the GEMIN4 gene and the risk of prostate cancer.     

Association between genetic variants in glutathione peroxidase 1 gene and risk of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis

To examine the association between glutathione peroxidase 1 (GPx1) gene Pro198Leu polymorphism with the development and progression of prostate cancer. A comprehensive search was conducted to identify all case-control studies of GPx1 polymorphisms and prostate cancer. Statistical analysis was performed with the software program Stata, version 11.0, and Review Manage, version 4.2. A total of 7 eligible studies relating the GPx1 polymorphism to the risk of prostate cancer were identified. The results indicated no significant association between GPx1 polymorphisms and prostate cancer susceptibility in the dominant model (random effects OR 0.75, 95 % CI 0.48-1.18), recessive model (random effects OR 0.47, 95 % CI 0.22-1.01) and co-dominant genetic model (random effects OR 0.72, 95 % CI 0.43-1.21). For the analysis of GPx1 polymorphism and progression of prostate cancer, no significant association were found in the dominant model (fixed effects OR 1.20, 95 % CI 0.95-1.52), recessive model (fixed effects OR 0.69, 95 % CI 0.48-1.00) and co-dominant genetic model (fixed effects OR 0.95, 95 % CI 0.79-1.15). Egger's test showed that publication bias was not present in all the comparisons.     

Association of metformin use with cancer incidence and mortality: A meta-analysis

PurposeTo assess the effect of metformin intake on cancer incidence and mortality.MethodsOriginal articles in English published until June 15, 2012 were searched for in electronic databases (MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science and EMBASE databases) and relevant reviews were examined. Meta-analysis was applied to calculate the summary relative risk (SRR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the robustness of the pooled estimator. The risk of publication bias was assessed by the Egger regression asymmetry test.ResultsAccording to the eligibility criteria, 37 studies comprising 1,535,636 participants, were selected in terms of intervention and data of cancer incidence or mortality. Among metformin users compared with non-users, the SRR for overall-cancer incidence was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.64–0.83) and that for mortality was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.76–0.89). The risk reductions for liver, pancreatic, colorectal and breast cancer incidence were 78%, 46%, 23% and 6%, respectively. Also, metformin can reduce the mortality of liver cancer (SRR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09–0.60) and breast cancer (SRR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40–0.99). No statistically significant association between metformin and prostate cancer incidence was found.ConclusionsMetformin can reduce the incidence of overall cancer, liver cancer, pancreatic cancer, colorectal cancer and breast cancer as well as the mortality of overall cancer, liver cancer and breast cancer. No beneficial effect on prostate cancer incidence was found for meformin intake in the meta-analysis.     

The diagnostic and prognostic values of microRNA-196a in cancer

MicroRNA-196a (miR-196a) was previously reported to be up-regulated in cancers, and it has the diagnostic and prognostic values in cancers. Whereas, the conclusion was still unclear according to the published data. To assess such roles of miR-196a in cancers, the present study was conducted based on published data and online cancer-related databases. To identify the relevant published data, we searched articles in databases and then the relevant data were extracted to evaluate the correlation between miR-196a expression and diagnosis, prognosis for cancer patients. The pooled results showed that miR-196a was a valuable diagnostic biomarker in cancer (area under curve (AUC) = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.84–0.90; sensitivity (SEN) = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.64–0.81; specificity (SPE) = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.81–0.95), which was consistent with the data from databases (breast cancer: miR-196a-3p: AUC = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.74–0.79; miR-196a-5p: AUC = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.66–0.75; pancreatic cancer: miR-196a-3p: AUC = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.73–0.87; miR-196a-5p: AUC = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.51–0.71). In addition, the pooled result revealed that elevated miR-196a expression in tumor tissues (HR = 2.54, 95% CI: 1.79–3.61, P_{Heterogeneity}=0.000, I² = 75.8%) or serum/plasma (HR = 4.06, 95% CI: 2.67–6.18, P_{Heterogeneity}=0.668, I² = 0%) of patients was an unfavorable survival biomarker, which was consistent with the data from databases (adrenocortical carcinoma: HR = 5.70; esophageal carcinoma: HR = 1.93; brain lower grade glioma: HR = 2.91; {"type":"entrez-geo","attrs":{"text":"GSE40267","term_id":"40267"}}GSE40267: HR = 2.47, 95% CI: 1.2–5.07; TCGA: HR = 1.82, 95% CI: 1.21–2.74; {"type":"entrez-geo","attrs":{"text":"GSE19783","term_id":"19783"}}GSE19783: HR = 4.24, 95% CI: 1–18.06). In short, our results demonstrated that miR-196a in tumor tissue or serum/plasma could be used as a prognostic and diagnostic values for cancers.     

Diagnostic Accuracy of Lipopolysaccharide-Binding Protein as Biomarker for Sepsis in Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

IntroductionLipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP) is widely reported as a biomarker to differentiate infected from non-infected patients. The diagnostic use of LBP for sepsis remains a matter of debate. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic accuracy of serum LBP for sepsis in adult patients.MethodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the accuracy of LBP for sepsis diagnosis. A systematic search in PubMed and EMBASE for studies that evaluated the diagnostic role of LBP for sepsis through December 2015 was conducted. We searched these databases for original, English language, research articles that studied the diagnostic accuracy between septic and non-septic adult patients. Sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of accuracy, such as diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of LBP were pooled using the Hierarchical Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic (HSROC) method.ResultsOur search returned 53 reports, of which 8 fulfilled the inclusion criteria, accounting for 1684 patients. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of LBP for diagnosis of sepsis by the HSROC method were 0.64 (95% CI: 0.56–0.72) and 0.63 (95% CI: 0.53–0.73), respectively. The value of the DOR was 3.0 (95% CI: 2.0–4.0) and the AUC was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.64–0.72). Meta-regression analysis revealed that cut-off values accounted for the heterogeneity of sensitivity and sample size (> = 150) accounted for the heterogeneity of specificity.ConclusionsBased on the results of our meta-analysis, LBP had weak sensitivity and specificity in the detection of sepsis. LBP may not be practically recommended for clinical utilization as a single biomarker.     

Lack of association between miR-149 C>T polymorphism and cancer susceptibility: a meta-analysis based on 4,677 cases and 4,830 controls

To derive a more precise estimation of the relationship between miR-149 C>T polymorphism and cancer risk, a meta-analysis was performed. A total of 8 studies including 4,677 cases and 4,830 controls were involved in this meta-analysis. Overall, no significantly elevated cancer risk was associated with miR-149 T allele when all studies were pooled into the meta-analysis (CT vs. CC: OR = 0.977, 95 % CI = 0.882-1.082; TT vs. CC: OR = 0.985, 95 % CI = 0.857-1.132; dominant model: OR = 0.984, 95 % CI = 0.893-1.084; recessive model: OR = 1.026, 95 % CI = 0.931-1.132). In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity or study design, no significantly increased risks were found under all models. When stratified by cancer type, there were no significant cancer risk changes for lung cancer, breast cancer or colorectal cancer when miR-149 T allele was included. In conclusion, this meta-analysis suggests that the miR-149 C>T polymorphism may not contribute to cancer susceptibility.