| Title |
Prognostic significance of miR-126 in various cancers: a meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
OncoTargets and therapy, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ott.s103481 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yuanli Dong, Chengrui Fu, Hui Guan, Zicheng Zhang, Tao Zhou, Baosheng Li |
| Abstract |
Recent studies have demonstrated that microRNA-126 (miR-126) might be a promising prognostic factor for cancer patients. This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effectiveness of miR-126 as a prognostic biomarker for various cancers. The search of studies was performed by using PubMed and Embase until January 22, 2016. Pooled hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for patients' survival was calculated. A fixed-effect or random-effects model was applied according to heterogeneity. The trim and fill method was used to adjust pooled HR. In all 17 articles comprising of 2,437 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The results indicated that a high level of miR-126 played a favorable role in the overall survival (HR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.62-0.79, random-effects model), with a heterogeneity measure index of I (2)=63.2% (P<0.01). Subgroup analyses showed that pooled HR was more significant in patients with digestive system cancers (HR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.59-0.83, fixed-effects model) and respiratory system cancers (HR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.59-0.85, random-effects model). Owing to publication bias, HR was adjusted to 0.59 (0.463-0.752, P<0.01) by the trim and fill method. miR-126 could be a promising biomarker for cancer prognosis prediction, especially in patients with digestive or respiratory system cancers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 22% |
| Unknown | 1 | 4% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 39% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 26% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 2 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 May 2016.
All research outputs
#15,879,822
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#839
of 2,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,562
of 315,181 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#39
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,967 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
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 315,181 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 128 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.