4.6 Review

Prognostic significance of CircRNAs expression in oral squamous cell carcinoma

Journal

ORAL DISEASES
Volume 29, Issue 4, Pages 1439-1453

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/odi.14188

Keywords

circular RNA; clinical pathology; meta-analysis; oral squamous cell carcinoma; prognosis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This systematic review comprehensively evaluates the clinicopathological and prognostic value of dysregulated expression of circRNAs in OSCC, and suggests that circRNAs may serve as candidate biomarkers for the prognosis and clinicopathology of OSCC.
This systematic review was aimed to comprehensively evaluate the clinicopathological and prognostic value of dysregulated expression of circRNAs in OSCC. The research was carried out by searching mainstream electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, LILACS, and Cochrane Library to collect relevant studies on prognostic role of circRNAs in OSCC. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the association between circRNAs expression, overall survival (OS), disease/recurrence/progression survival (DFS/RFS/PFS), and clinical parameters. This research included 1813 patients from 26 selected articles. The pooled HR values (95% CIs) in OS were 2.38 (1.92-2.93) for oncogenic circRNAs and 0.43 (0.28-0.66) for tumor-suppressor circRNAs, respectively, in DFS/RFS/PFS were 2.34 (1.73-3.17). The meta-analysis on clinicopathology features showed higher level of oncogenic circRNAs is related to advanced TNM stage, tumor stage, worse histological differentiation, positive lymph node and distant metastasis, while enforced expression of tumor-suppressor circRNAs is related to inferior TNM stage, tumor stage and lymphatic metastasis. In conclusion, our meta-analysis implies that circRNAs may be candidate biomarkers for the prognosis and clinicopathology of OSCC.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available