Display options
Cite
Ding M, Li Y, Wang H, et al. Diagnostic value of urinary microRNAs as non-invasive biomarkers for bladder cancer: a meta-analysis. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015;8(9):15432-40
Ding, M., Li, Y., Wang, H., Lv, Y., Liang, J., Wang, J., & Li, C. (2015). Diagnostic value of urinary microRNAs as non-invasive biomarkers for bladder cancer: a meta-analysis. International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 8(9), 15432-40.
Ding, Mingxia, et al. "Diagnostic value of urinary microRNAs as non-invasive biomarkers for bladder cancer: a meta-analysis." International journal of clinical and experimental medicine vol. 8,9 (2015): 15432-40.
Ding M, Li Y, Wang H, Lv Y, Liang J, Wang J, Li C. Diagnostic value of urinary microRNAs as non-invasive biomarkers for bladder cancer: a meta-analysis. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015 Sep 15;8(9):15432-40. eCollection 2015. PMID: 26629032; PMCID: PMC4658921.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015 Sep 15;8(9):15432-40. eCollection 2015.

Diagnostic value of urinary microRNAs as non-invasive biomarkers for bladder cancer: a meta-analysis.

International journal of clinical and experimental medicine

Mingxia Ding, Yi Li, Haifeng Wang, Yongchang Lv, Jianwei Liang, Jiansong Wang, Chong Li

Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University Kunming 650101, China.
  2. Department of Anesthesiology, Peking University Third Hospital Beijing 100083, China.
  3. Department of Urology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University Kunming 650101, China ; CAS Key Laboratory of Infection and Immunity, Institute of Biophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences Beijing 100101, China.

PMID: 26629032 PMCID: PMC4658921

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bladder cancer (BC) is the fifth most common malignancy worldwide. The expression levels of microRNAs (miRNAs) in urine samples of BC patients have been demonstrated to be different from healthy people. Several studies focusing on the diagnostic value of urinary miRNAs for BC detection have been reported. The aim of this meta-analysis was to access the overall diagnostic accuracy comprehensively and quantitatively.

METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and CNKI were searched without language restrictions for studies about the diagnostic value of miRNAs for BC. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (PLR and NLR, respectively), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated using the random effects model. The summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was also generated and the area under the curve (AUC) was also reckoned to assess the diagnosis accuracy. Besides, Chi-square test and I(2) test were used to assess the heterogeneity between studies. Publication bias was evaluated by the Deeks' funnel plot asymmetry test.

RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included in this meta-analysis, with a total of 1,128 BC patients and 1,057 matched controls. The overall sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR and DOR of urinary miRNAs for the diagnosis of BC were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.67-0.75), 0.75 (95% CI: 0.70-0.79), 2.8 (95% CI: 2.3-3.4), 0.39 (95% CI: 0.33-0.46) and 7 (95% CI: 5-10), respectively. The area under the SROC curve was 0.79. Subgroup analyses suggested that the ethnicity and miRNA profiling had an obvious influence on the diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSION: The current analysis suggested that urinary miRNA panels may be a promising noninvasive biomarker in the diagnosis of BC.

Keywords: Urinary; bladder cancer; diagnostic value; meta-analysis; microRNAs

References

  1. Eur Urol. 2004 Mar;45(3):292-6 - PubMed
  2. Oncogene. 2006 Oct 9;25(46):6188-96 - PubMed
  3. Eur Urol. 2005 Jun;47(6):736-48 - PubMed
  4. Cancer Res. 2009 Nov 1;69(21):8472-81 - PubMed
  5. Am J Pathol. 2012 May;180(5):1808-15 - PubMed
  6. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2003 Jan;41(1):104-10 - PubMed
  7. Cancer Res. 2009 Jun 1;69(11):4851-60 - PubMed
  8. Br J Cancer. 2012 Jun 26;107(1):123-8 - PubMed
  9. Int J Oncol. 2012 Nov;41(5):1871-8 - PubMed
  10. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2009 May;63(5):337 - PubMed
  11. J Urol. 2001 Aug;166(2):470-5 - PubMed
  12. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003 Nov;56(11):1129-35 - PubMed
  13. CA Cancer J Clin. 2010 Sep-Oct;60(5):277-300 - PubMed
  14. BMJ. 1994 Jul 16;309(6948):188 - PubMed
  15. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Oct 18;155(8):529-36 - PubMed
  16. J Clin Oncol. 2006 Dec 10;24(35):5552-64 - PubMed
  17. Cancer Sci. 2011 Mar;102(3):522-9 - PubMed
  18. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2003 Aug;47(2):91-107 - PubMed
  19. Urol Oncol. 2010 Nov-Dec;28(6):655-61 - PubMed
  20. Urol Oncol. 2011 Nov-Dec;29(6):794-801.e1 - PubMed
  21. Cancer Res. 2007 Aug 15;67(16):7713-22 - PubMed
  22. Am J Pathol. 2007 Sep;171(3):728-38 - PubMed
  23. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Nov 26;99(24):15524-9 - PubMed
  24. BMJ. 2003 Sep 6;327(7414):557-60 - PubMed
  25. Curr Opin Urol. 2001 Sep;11(5):503-9 - PubMed
  26. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006 Apr;6(4):259-69 - PubMed
  27. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2012 Jun;10 (2):106-13 - PubMed
  28. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2005 Apr;31(3):304-8 - PubMed
  29. Transl Res. 2015 Jun;165(6):731-9 - PubMed
  30. Urol Oncol. 2010 Jan-Feb;28(1):39-48 - PubMed
  31. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012 Jan-Feb;62(1):10-29 - PubMed
  32. Nat Rev Cancer. 2005 Sep;5(9):713-25 - PubMed
  33. Int J Cancer. 2009 Jul 15;125(2):345-52 - PubMed
  34. Health Technol Assess. 2005 Mar;9(12 ):1-113, iii - PubMed
  35. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006 Nov;6(11):857-66 - PubMed
  36. Int J Cancer. 2013 Dec 1;133(11):2631-41 - PubMed
  37. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub. 2006 Nov;150(2):205-15 - PubMed
  38. Urol Oncol. 2013 Nov;31(8):1701-8 - PubMed
  39. Dig Dis Sci. 2014 Feb;59(2):436-45 - PubMed
  40. Can Urol Assoc J. 2013 Jan-Feb;7(1-2):28-32 - PubMed
  41. Oncol Rep. 2013 Oct;30(4):1949-56 - PubMed

Publication Types