| Objectives:To comprehensively investigate the diagnostic value of blood lncRNA for ovarian cancer and expect to provide certain guidelines for clinical practice,all researches on blood lncRNA in diagnosis of ovarian cancer were studied by using Meta-analysis.Methods:Relevant literatures on the diagnostic value of blood lncRNA for ovarian cancer were retrieved from inception through November 30(th),2020 for published by using computer.Databases including CNKI,WANFANG,VIP,CBM,PubMed,Web of Science and Elsevier ScienceDirect.According to the pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria,literatures were systematically screened.To extract the true positive value(TP),false positive value(FP),false negative value(FN)and true negative value(TN)from the final full-text literatures.The quality of literatures were evaluated by Rev Man 5.4 software,Stata 14.0 and Meta-DiSc 1.4 software were utilized to analyze the data.The statistical evaluation indexes included sensitivity,specificity,positive likelihood ratio(PLR),negative likelihood ratio(NLR),diagnostic odds ratio(DOR),and the area under the curve(AUC)was calculated of the overall summary receiver operator characteristic curve(SROC)was drawn.Results:Ten literatures contain twelve studies with a total of 773 ovarian cancer patients and 590 non-patients were included in this Meta-analysis.The sensitivity of blood lncRNA for diagnosing ovarian cancer was 83%(95%CI:76%～88%),specificity was 82%(95%CI:76%-87%),PLR was 4.7(95%CI:3.4～6.5),NLR was 0.21(95%CI:0.15～0.30),DOR was 23(95%CI:13～41),and the AUC was calculatedto be 0.89(95%CI:0.86～0.92).The Spearman correlation coefficient of the threshold effect was-0.168,P value was 0.602,the Deek’s test gives a P value of publication bias was 0.795.Sensitivity analysis didn’t found the resource of heterogeneous.The Meta-regression analyse based on sample size(<100 vs.≥100),type of sample(plasma vs.seeum),type of endogenous control(U6 vs.non U6),type of control(healthy vs.benign or benign+healthy),number of lncRNA(single vs.consociation),P values were bigger than 0.05.The sensitivity of blood lncRNA for diagnosing patients at FIGO Ⅰ～Ⅱ stage was 54.5%,specificity was 81.3%,PLR was 2.9,NLR was 0.56,DOR was 5,and the AUC was calculated to be 0.75.The sensitivity of blood lncRNA for diagnosing patients at FIGO Ⅲ～Ⅳ stage was 90%,specificity was 80%,PLR was 4.5,NLR was 0.12,DOR was 37,and the AUC was calculated to be 0.93.Conclusions:1.The diagnostic value of blood lncRNA for ovarian cancer was in the high level by utilizing the Meta-analysis,which implied that blood lncRNA could have the potential to become a diagnostic marker for ovarian cancer.2.The diagnostic value and sensitivity of blood lncRNA for diagnosing patients at FIGO Ⅲ-Ⅳ stage is better than patients at FIGO Ⅰ～Ⅱ stage.3.Sample size,type of sample,type of endogenous control,type of control,and number of lncRNA have little effect on the diagnostic value of blood lncRNA for ovarian cancer.However,this result needs more researches to verify. |
