Key result
Circulating microRNAs yielded an exploratory pooled diagnostic area under the curve of 0.897 for clinically diagnosed viral myocarditis, though high heterogeneity precludes their current clinical use.
Why the study?
Do circulating microRNAs accurately diagnose clinically suspected viral myocarditis?
Do circulating microRNAs accurately diagnose clinically suspected viral myocarditis?
Effect estimate: AUC 0.897
While circulating microRNAs show promise as biological signals for myocarditis, significant methodological limitations and lack of standardization mean they are not yet ready for clinical use as a diagnostic test.
MicroRNAs in myocarditis: promising biological signals, but not yet a clinical testMyocarditis remains one of the most challenging syndromes in cardiovascular medicine.Its presentation ranges from an incidental increase in cardiac troponin to infarct-like chest pain, ventricular arrhythmias, advanced heart failure, cardiogenic shock, or sudden cardiac death.Moreover, myocarditis is not a single disease, but a heterogeneous inflammatory myocardial syndrome caused by infectious, immune-mediated, toxic, genetic, and occasionally overlapping mechanisms [1][2][3].Current diagnostic pathways therefore rely on the integration of clinical presentation, electrocardiography, circulating biomarkers, echocardiography, cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR), coronary assessment when appropriate, and endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) in selected high-risk or diagnostically uncertain cases [1,[4][5][6].None of these tools is perfect.Cardiac troponin identifies myocardial injury but is neither sufficiently sensitive nor specific for myocarditis.CMR can non-invasively demonstrate oedema and non-ischaemic myocardial injury, but its diagnostic performance depends on timing, protocols, disease phenotype, and local expertise.EMB provides unique histological, immunohistochemical, and molecular information, but its use is necessarily selective because it is invasive and affected by sampling error [1,6].Against this background, circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) are attractive biomarker candidates.These small non-coding RNA molecules regulate post-transcriptional gene expression and participate in inflammatory signalling, immune-cell differentiation, cardiomyocyte injury, fibrosis, and ventricular remodelling [7,8].Their relative stability in blood, particularly when transported within extracellular vesicles, offers the prospect of a biologically informative "liquid biopsy".In their systematic review and meta-analysis, Martinez Holst and colleagues examined 26 studies evaluating miRNAs in clinically diagnosed viral myocarditis [9].They identified 42 differentially expressed miRNAs and reported an exploratory pooled diagnostic area under the curve (AUC) of 0.897, with pooled sensitivity of 0.758 and specificity of 0.881.The pooled AUC for discrimination of fulminant myocarditis was 0.883.Exosomal and circulating cell-free miRNAs showed broadly similar summary performance.These findings are encouraging, but their clinical meaning requires careful interpretation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Massimo Imazio (2026) conducted an editorial in Viral myocarditis. Circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) vs. Healthy controls or other conditions was evaluated on Diagnostic accuracy for viral myocarditis (AUC 0.897). Circulating microRNAs yielded an exploratory pooled diagnostic area under the curve of 0.897 for clinically diagnosed viral myocarditis, though high heterogeneity precludes their current clinical use.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: