↓ Skip to main content

Diagnostic value of circulating microRNAs as biomarkers for breast cancer: a meta-analysis study

Overview of attention for article published in Tumor Biology, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
Diagnostic value of circulating microRNAs as biomarkers for breast cancer: a meta-analysis study
Published in
Tumor Biology, October 2014
DOI 10.1007/s13277-014-2700-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhaolei Cui, Donghong Lin, Wenfang Song, Meihuan Chen, Dan Li

Abstract

Recent studies have provided new insights into the diagnostic value of circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) for breast cancer (BCa). However, the inconsistent results between studies have prevented the widespread usage of miRNAs in clinics. To systematically assess the potential diagnostic value of circulating miRNAs in BCa, we performed a comprehensive meta-analysis. Eligible studies were retrieved by searching electronic databases. The quality of the studies was assessed on the basis of quality assessment for studies of diagnostic accuracy (QUADAS) criteria. The bivariate meta-analysis model was employed to summarize the diagnostic indices and plot the summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) curve. A total of 15 studies were included in this meta-analysis, involving 1368 BCa patients and 849 healthy controls. Our bivariate random effects meta-analysis yielded an area under curve (AUC) value of 0.9217, with a sensitivity of 0.82 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.80-0.83) and specificity of 0.82 (95 % CI 0.80-0.85) for the use of miRNAs in differentiating BCa patients from healthy controls. Notably, our subgroup analysis suggested that a combination of multiple miRNAs (AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.9518, 0.87, and 0.88, respectively) seemed to harbor higher accuracy than single miRNA-based assays (AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.8923, 0.79, and 0.77, respectively). Altogether, our data indicate that circulating miRNA profiling has a potential to be used as a screening test for BCa, among which, the detection of a combined multiple miRNAs may be a more comprehensive indicator than individual miRNA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 4%
Unknown 26 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Student > Master 3 11%
Lecturer 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 7 26%
Unknown 5 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 19%
Unspecified 1 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 7 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 October 2014.
All research outputs
#20,239,689
of 22,766,595 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,834
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,165
of 255,208 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#73
of 134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,766,595 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,622 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 255,208 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 134 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.