Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37047088›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of molecular sciences2023

Liquid Biopsy in Endometriosis: A Systematic Review.

Carlo Ronsini, Pietro Fumiento, Irene Iavarone, Pier Francesco Greco, Luigi Cobellis, Pasquale De Franciscis

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of molecular sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Carlo RonsiniDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", 80138 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9023-282X
Pietro FumientoDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", 80138 Naples, Italy.
Irene IavaroneDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", 80138 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3057-661X
Pier Francesco GrecoUnit of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Woman, Child and Public Health, A. Gemelli, IRCCS, University Hospital Foundation, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3491-4567
Luigi CobellisDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", 80138 Naples, Italy.
Pasquale De FranciscisDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", 80138 Naples, Italy.
University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" · ITAgostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite laparoscopy being a standardized option to diagnose pelvic endometriotic implants, non-invasive biomarkers are necessary to avoid the discomfort of invasive procedures. Recent evidence suggests a potential role of microRNAs (miRNAs) as feasible biomarkers for the early diagnosis of endometriosis. Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, we systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Science Direct in January 2023. We provided no restriction on the country and year of publication, and considered English published articles. We selected studies including patients with endometriosis and describing miRNA regulation in the context of endometriosis. Overall, 45 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, and 2045 patients with endometriosis and 1587 controls were screened. Patients were analyzed concerning miRNAs expression and sources, stage of disease, and symptoms, and compared to controls. Among DEMs, the ones with the widest delta between endometriosis patients and controls-Relative Expression ≥ 4 Log2(ratio)-were miR-145, miR-191, miR-195, miR-21-5p, miR-106b-5p, miR-195-5p, miR-451a, miR-200c, miR-20a-5p, and miR-15a-5p. Although the epigenetic regulation is partially unclear, miRNAs are valid biomarkers to diagnose endometriotic lesions in symptomatic and non-symptomatic women. MiRNAs modulation should be clarified, especially during therapies or relapse, to plan targeted management protocols.

Indexed as

EndometriosisMicroRNAsBiomarkersEpigenesis, GeneticFemaleHumansLiquid BiopsyBiomarkersMicroRNAsMIRN145 microRNA, humancell-derived microparticlesearly-stageendometriosisexosomesmicro-RNA

Identifiers

PMID37047088
PMCPMC10094565
OpenAlexW4360859071

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.