All muscle contraction occurs due to the cyclical interaction between sarcomeric thin and thick filament proteins within the myocyte. The thin filament consists of the proteins actin, tropomyosin, Troponin C, Troponin I, and Troponin T. Mutations in these proteins can result in various forms of cardiomyopathy, including hypertrophic, restrictive, and dilated phenotypes and account for as many as 30% of all cases of inherited cardiomyopathy. There is significant evidence that thin filament mutations contribute to dysregulation of Ca2+ within the sarcomere and may have a distinct pathomechanism of disease from cardiomyopathy associated with thick filament mutations. A number of distinct clinical findings appear to be correlated with thin-filament mutations: greater degrees of restrictive cardiomyopathy and relatively less left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy and LV outflow tract obstruction than that seen with thick filament mutations, increased morbidity associated with heart failure, increased arrhythmia burden and potentially higher mortality. Most therapies that improve outcomes in heart failure blunt the neurohormonal pathways involved in cardiac remodeling, while most therapies for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy involve use of negative inotropes to reduce LV hypertrophy or septal reduction therapies to reduce LV outflow tract obstruction. None of these therapies directly address the underlying sarcomeric dysfunction associated with thin-filament mutations. With mounting evidence that thin filament cardiomyopathies occur through a distinct mechanism, there is need for therapies targeting the unique, underlying mechanisms tailored for each patient depending on a given mutation.

BACKGROUND: MicroRNAs (miRNAs) have been reported to be aberrantly expressed in patients with cancer. Many studies have shown that circulating miRNAs could play potential roles as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers of cancers. The aim of this meta-analysis is to summarize the role of circulating miR-21 as a biomarker in patients with a variety of carcinomas.
METHODS: Eligible studies were identified and assessed for quality through multiple search strategies. For diagnostic meta-analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of miR-21 in the diagnosis of cancer were pooled using bivariate random-effects approach models. For prognostic meta-analysis, pooled hazard ratios (HRs) of circulating miR-21 for survival were calculated.
RESULTS: A total of 36 studies dealing with various carcinomas were included for the systemic review. Among them, 23 studies were finally enrolled in the global meta-analysis (17 studies for diagnosis and 6 studies for prognosis). For diagnostic meta-analysis, the overall pooled results for sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LRP), negative likelihood ratios (LRN) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 75.7% (95% CI: 67.1%-82.6%), 79.3% (95% CI: 74.2%-83.5%), 3.65 (95% CI: 2.83-4.70), 0.31 (95% CI: 0.22-0.43), and 11.88 (95% CI: 6.99-20.19), respectively. For prognostic meta-analysis, the pooled HR of higher miR-21 expression in circulation was 2.37 (95% CI: 1.83-3.06, P<0.001), which could significantly predict poorer survival in general carcinomas. Importantly, subgroup analysis suggested that higher expression of miR-21 correlated with worse overall survival (OS) significantly in carcinomas of digestion system (HR, 5.77 [95% CI: 2.65-12.52]).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that circulating miR-21 may not suitable to be a diagnostic biomarker, but it has a prognostic value in patients with cancer.