CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 160MicroRNA in disease regulationGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentCancer-related molecular mechanisms research

MicroRNAs as potential biomarkers for the diagnosis of glioma: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Open access
Zhou, Qian, Liu, Jing, Quan, Jing, Liu, Wenlan, Tan, Hui, Li, Weiping·2018·Cancer Science
DOI 10.1111/cas.13714PMC PMC6125451
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Glioma is the most common central nervous system tumor and associated with poor prognosis. Identifying effective diagnostic biomarkers for glioma is particularly important in order to guide optimizing treatment. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) have drawn much attention because of their diagnostic value in diverse cancers, including glioma. We summarized studies to identify the potential diagnostic values of miRNAs in glioma patients. We included articles reporting miRNAs for differentiation of glioma patients from controls. We calculated sensitivities, specificities, and area under the curves (AUC) of individual miRNA and miRNA panels. We found that overall sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of miRNAs in diagnosis of glioma were 85% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81‐0.89), 90% (95% CI 0.85‐0.93), and 93% (95% CI 0.91‐0.95), respectively. Meta‐regression analysis showed that the detection of miRNAs expression in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and brain tissue largely improved the diagnostic accuracy. Likewise, panels of multiple miRNAs could enhance the pooled sensitivity. Moreover, AUC of miR‐21 was 0.88, with 86% sensitivity and 94% specificity. This study demonstrated that miRNAs could function as potential diagnosis markers in glioma. Detection of miRNAs in CSF and brain tissue displays high accuracy in the diagnosis of glioma.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/cas.13714

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A meta-analysis of nine studies revealed that high miR-21 expression is associated with a poor prognosis in glioma patients.

    “A meta-analysis of nine studies revealed that high miR-21 expression is associated with a poor prognosis in glioma patients [34], [35].”

    From miR-21 as a diagnostic and prognostic biomarker in glioma: tissue and serum expression analysis in a Pakistani cohort (2026) · cites this paper as [35]

    The Results (Study characteristics; page unavailable) say the paper’s miR-21 meta-analysis included four studies, not nine. The Results (Diagnosis; page unavailable) report diagnostic accuracy, not an association between high miR-21 expression and poor prognosis. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 36

  1. [1]Omuro A, DeAngelis LM. Glioblastoma and other malignant gliomas: a clinical review. JAMA. 2013; 310: 1842‐ 1850. 24193082
  2. [2]Zhang AS, Ostrom QT, Kruchko C, Rogers L, Peereboom DM, Barnholtz‐Sloan JS. Complete prevalence of malignant primary brain tumors registry data in the United States compared with other common cancers, 2010. Neuro Oncol. 2017; 19: 726‐ 735. 28039365 PMC5464453
  3. [3]Hombach‐Klonisch S, Mehrpour M, Shojaei S, et al. Glioblastoma and chemoresistance to alkylating agents: involvement of apoptosis, autophagy, and unfolded protein response. Pharmacol Ther. 2018; 184: 13‐ 41. 29080702
  4. [4]Diamandis P, Aldape KD. Insights from molecular profiling of adult glioma. J Clin Oncol. 2017; 35: 2386‐ 2393. 28640696
  5. [6]Lan F, Qing Q, Pan Q, Hu M, Yu H, Yue X. Serum exosomal miR‐301a as a potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarker for human glioma. Cell Oncol. 2018; 41: 25‐ 33. PMC12995224 29076027
  6. [7]Qu ST, Guan JH, Liu YH. Identification of microRNAs as novel biomarkers for glioma detection: a meta‐analysis based on 11 articles. J Neurol Sci. 2015; 348: 181‐ 187. 25510379
  7. [8]Ma C, Nguyen HPT, Luwor RB, et al. A comprehensive meta‐analysis of circulation miRNAs in glioma as potential diagnostic biomarker. PLoS ONE. 2018; 13: e0189452. 29444091 PMC5812551
  8. [9]Akers JC, Hua W, Li HY, et al. A cerebrospinal fluid microRNA signature as biomarker for glioblastoma. Oncotarget. 2017; 8: 68769‐ 68779. 28978155 PMC5620295
  9. [10]Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS‐2: A revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011; 155: 529‐ 536. 22007046
  10. [11]Akers JC, Ramakrishnan V, Kim R, et al. miR‐21 in the extracellular vesicles (EVs) of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF): a platform for glioblastoma biomarker development. PLoS ONE. 2013; 8: e78115. 24205116 PMC3804457
  11. [12]Baraniskin A, Kuhnhenn J, Schlegel U, et al. Identification of microRNAs in the cerebrospinal fluid as biomarker for the diagnosis of glioma. Neuro Oncol. 2012; 14: 29‐ 33. 21937590 PMC3245991
  12. [13]Chen J, Yang L, Wang X. Reduced circulating microRNA‐203 predicts poor prognosis for glioblastoma. Cancer Biomark. 2017; 20: 521‐ 526. 28946553
  13. [14]D'Urso PI, D'Urso OF, Gianfreda CD, Mezzolla V, Storelli C, Marsigliante S. miR‐15b and miR‐21 as circulating biomarkers for diagnosis of glioma. Curr Genomics. 2015; 16: 304‐ 311. 27047250 PMC4763968
  14. [15]Huang Q, Wang C, Hou Z, et al. Serum microRNA‐376 family as diagnostic and prognostic markers in human gliomas. Cancer Biomark. 2017; 19: 137‐ 144. 28211798 PMC13020711
  15. [16]Lai NS, Wu DG, Fang XG, et al. Serum microRNA‐210 as a potential noninvasive biomarker for the diagnosis and prognosis of glioma. Br J Cancer. 2015; 112: 1241‐ 1246. 25756397 PMC4385967
  16. [17]Li X, Zheng J, Chen L, Diao H, Liu Y. Predictive and prognostic roles of abnormal expression of tissue miR‐125b, miR‐221, and miR‐222 in glioma. Mol Neurobiol 2016; 53: 577‐ 583. 25502291
  17. [18]Manterola L, Guruceaga E, Pérez‐Larraya JG, et al. A small noncoding RNA signature found in exosomes of GBM patient serum as a diagnostic tool. Neuro Oncol 2014; 16: 520‐ 527. 24435880 PMC3956347
  18. [19]Nass D, Rosenwald S, Meiri E, et al. MiR‐92b and miR‐9/9*are specifically expressed in brain primary tumors and can be used to differentiate primary from metastatic brain tumors. Brain Pathol. 2009; 19: 375‐ 383. 18624795 PMC2728890
  19. [20]Regazzo G, Terrenato I, Spagnuolo M, et al. A restricted signature of serum miRNAs distinguishes glioblastoma from lower grade gliomas. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2016; 35: 124. 27476114 PMC4967504
  20. [21]Roth P, Wischhusen J, Happold C, et al. A specific miRNA signature in the peripheral blood of glioblastoma patients. J Neurochem. 2011; 118: 449‐ 457. 21561454
  21. [22]Santangelo A, Imbruce P, Gardenghi B, et al. A microRNA signature from serum exosomes of patients with glioma as complementary diagnostic biomarker. J Neurooncol. 2018; 136: 51‐ 62. 29076001
  22. [23]Shao N, Wang L, Xue L, Wang R, Lan Q. Plasma miR‐454‐3p as a potential prognostic indicator in human glioma. Neurol Sci. 2015; 36: 309‐ 313. 25190548
  23. [24]Sun J, Liao K, Wu X, Huang J, Zhang S, Lu X. Serum microRNA‐128 as a biomarker for diagnosis of glioma. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015; 8: 456‐ 463. 25785017 PMC4358472
  24. [25]Tang Y, Zhao S, Wang J, Li D, Ren Q, Tang Y. Plasma miR‐122 as a potential diagnostic and prognostic indicator in human glioma. Neurol Sci. 2017; 38: 1087‐ 1092. 28367610
  25. [26]Wang Q, Li P, Li A, et al. Plasma specific miRNAs as predictive biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis of glioma. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2012; 31: 97. 23174013 PMC3554474
  26. [27]Wei X, Chen D, Lv T, Li G, Qu S. Serum MicroRNA‐125b as a potential biomarker for glioma diagnosis. Mol Neurobiol. 2016; 53: 163‐ 170. 25416859
  27. [28]Wu JH, Li LW, Jiang CP. Identification and evaluation of serum MicroRNA‐29 family for glioma screening. Mol Neurobiol. 2015; 52: 1540‐ 1546. 25367878
  28. [29]Xiao Y, Zhang L, Song Z, et al. Potential diagnostic and prognostic value of plasma circulating MicroRNA‐182 in human glioma. Med Sci Monit. 2016; 22: 855‐ 862. 26978735 PMC4795091
  29. [30]Xu W, Liang WB, Dai YX. A three‐miRNA signature as a potential biomarker for the diagnosis of glioma. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2017; 10: 2814‐ 2823.
  30. [31]Yang CH, Wang C, Chen X, et al. Identification of seven serum microRNAs from a genome‐wide serum microRNA expression profile as potential noninvasive biomarkers for malignant astrocytomas. Int J Cancer. 2013; 132: 116‐ 127. 22674182
  31. [32]Yue X, Lan F, Hu M, Pan Q, Wang Q, Wang J. Downregulation of serum microRNA‐205 as a potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarker for human glioma. J Neurosurg. 2016; 124: 122‐ 128. 26230475
  32. [33]Zhang R, Pang B, Xin T, et al. Plasma miR‐221/222 family as novel descriptive and prognostic biomarkers for glioma. Mol Neurobiol. 2016; 53: 1452‐ 1460. 25636684
  33. [34]Zhao SP, Yue SZ, Yang QH, et al. Serum microRNA‐451a expression and its diagnostic value in glioma. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2016; 9: 3678‐ 3682.
  34. [35]Zhi F, Shao N, Wang R, et al. Identification of 9 serum microRNAs as potential noninvasive biomarkers of human astrocytoma. Neuro Oncol. 2015; 17: 383‐ 391. 25140035 PMC4483096
  35. [36]Gozé C, Reynes C, Forestier L, Sabatier R, Duffau H. Pilot study of whole blood MicroRNAs as potential tools for diffuse low‐grade gliomas detection. Cell Mol Neurobiol. 2018; 38: 715‐ 725. 28815332 PMC11482016
  36. [37]Wacker C, Prkno A, Brunkhorst FM, Schlattmann P. Procalcitonin as a diagnostic marker for sepsis: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2013; 13: 426‐ 435. 23375419

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhou, Q., Liu, J., Quan, J., Liu, W., Tan, H., & Li, W.
Affiliations
  • Shenzhen University (CN)
  • Anhui Medical University (CN)
Corresponding author
Li, Weiping
ORCID
Venue
Cancer Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-08-03
Volume
109
Issue
9
Pages
2651-2659
ISSN
  • 1347-9032 (ISSN-L)
  • 1349-7006
DOI
10.1111/cas.13714
PMC
PMC6125451
OpenAlex
W2810223238
Cited by
160
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 3
FWCI
2.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Cancer Science (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2017M622881)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81772685)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › MicroRNA in disease regulation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer-related molecular mechanisms research
Keywords
glioma, microRNA, diagnostic biomarkers, miRNA panel, miR-21, cerebrospinal fluid, brain tissue, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity
MeSH terms
Brain, Brain Neoplasms, Glioma, Humans, Sensitivity and Specificity, Biomarkers, Tumor, MicroRNAs

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review