<p>Circulating microRNA as diagnostic biomarkers for haematological cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis</p>

Abstract

Purpose: Recent studies have validated microRNAs (miRNAs) as a diagnostic biomarker for haematological cancers. This study aimed to estimate the overall diagnostic accuracy of circulating miRNAs in haematological malignancies. Materials and Methods: Multiple databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library,) were searched until 19 th August 2017. Results: The meta-analysis included 50 studies from 20 publications. The diagnostic accuracy was assessed by pooled specificity, sensitivity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and area under the curve area (AUC) by random effect model. We used QUADAS (Quality Assessment for diagnostic accuracy studies) to evaluate the quality of the included studies. To perform the meta-analysis, we used Meta-Disk 1.4, Revman 5.3 and Stata 12.0 software. High diagnostic accuracy was demonstrated, with a sensitivity of 0.81, a specificity of 0.85, a PLR of 5.28, an NLR of 0.22, a DOR of 30.39, and an AUC of 0.91. Subgroup analyses showed better outcomes for the African population, combined miRNAs and leukaemia patients compared with other subgroups. Conclusion: Our results indicated that circulating miRNAs especially combined miRNA can be used as a diagnostic marker in haematological cancers.

The Potential Diagnostic Accuracy of Circulating MicroRNAs for Leukemia: A Meta-Analysis

“…However, Luna-Aguirre et al 13 found that miR-511 has very high diagnostic sensitivity and specificity in the plasma of ALL patients, both reaching 1.00, which is a very ideal biomarker. Moreover, both Xu 38 and Ommanuel’s 39 meta-analysis showed that miRNA circulating in the blood is a promising diagnostic biomarker for hematological cancer. Although these results are inconsistent, they indicate that miRNA is a promising biomarker for early diagnosis of leukemia.…”

“…Subgroup analyses suggested that the miRNA cluster showed a better diagnostic accuracy than single ones, which is consistent with the current research results. 38 , 39 For example, Wang et al 18 found that the diagnostic value of miR-29a + miR-142-3p in AML patients showed sensitivity was 90%, specificity was 100%, and the AUC value was 0.97; Zhu et al 21 found that miR-23a + miR-130a in CML patients have a sensitivity of 70%, a specificity of 95%, and an AUC value of 0.95; the diagnostic accuracy of each single miRNA was lower than that of the miRNA cluster. A single miRNA is not only expressed in hematological tumors, but also may fluctuate in other diseases, so a single miRNA has poor specificity.…”

Uncharacterized RNAs in Plasma of Alzheimer’s Patients Are Associated with Cognitive Impairment and Show a Potential Diagnostic Power

“…However, several reports showed promising results that have not been confirmed in independent studies [ 7 ]. The application of circulating RNA molecules, including non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs), as biomarkers has been widely explored in the last few decades; miRNAs have been suggested as diagnostic biomarkers for several diseases, including neurodegenerative [ 8 , 9 ], neurodevelopmental [ 10 ], traumatic [ 11 ], neoplastic [ 12 , 13 ], and metabolic conditions [ 14 , 15 ]. Indeed, miRNAs have been detected in all analyzed biological fluids [ 16 , 17 , 18 ], making them useful as disease biomarkers measurable in all body districts.…”

The Diagnostic Value of MicroRNAs as a Biomarker for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis

“…Subsequently, we analyzed the main source of heterogeneity and divided these studies into four subgroups. It was reported that the circulating miRNA concentrations might be associated with different ethnic groups [71]. Then, we found the studies in Egypt had better diagnostic accuracy than China.…”