Evidence Hub

Diagnostic efficacy of long non-coding RNA in lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Shuiping Dai, Jing Jin, Wei-Min Li

Postgraduate medical journal, 2018

3,044 participants · 18 citations

Abstract

The detection of long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) is a novel method for lung cancer diagnosis. However, the diagnostic efficacy of lncRNA in different studies is inconsistent. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to elucidate the diagnostic efficacy of lncRNA in identification of lung cancer including small cell lung cancer. The online PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, CNKI and Wanfang literature databases were searched to identify all related articles about the diagnostic efficacy of lncRNA for lung cancer. 28 articles including 3044 patients with lung cancer and 2598 controls were enrolled in our meta-analysis. lncRNA sustained a high diagnostic efficacy, pooled sensitivity of 0.82 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.84), specificity of 0.82 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.84) and area under the curve (AUC) of 0.88 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.91) in identification of patients with lung cancer from controls. Furthermore, the diagnostic efficacy of paralleled lncRNA was better than single lncRNA (sensitivity: 0.86 vs 0.80; specificity: 0.88 vs 0.78; AUC: 0.93 vs 0.86). MALAT1 had a better diagnostic efficacy than GAS5 (AUC: 0.90 vs 0.81; sensitivity: 0.83 vs 0.70; specificity: 0.83 vs 0.78). lncRNA in tissues was observed to achieve lower diagnostic efficacy than that in plasma or serum (AUC: 0.87 vs 0.90 vs 0.90) when stratified by sample types. In summary, our meta-analysis suggests that lncRNA might be a promising biomarker(s) for identifying lung cancer and the combination of lncRNA or with other biomarkers had a…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 3,044 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free