BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Systematic Reviews
Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Clin Oncol. Apr 24, 2026; 17(4): 117460
Published online Apr 24, 2026. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v17.i4.117460
Table 1 Summary of the main characteristics of the studies selected in the systematic review, mean ± SD/median (range)/n (%)
Ref.
Design
Country
Malignancy type
Number of participants
Age (years)
Gender
Antineoplastic agents
CIPN diagnosis
CIPN/non-CIPN
Sample
miRNAs detection
Davey et al[36], 2023Prospective cohortIrelandBreast cancer10155 (25-76)M: 0 (0%); F: 101 (100%)Paclitaxel. AC-T (n = 56) TC-H (n = 19) TC-HL (n = 6) other (n = 20)NCI-CTCAE34/67Whole bloodqRT-PCR
Ju et al[37], 2022Prospective cohortSouth KoreaGastric cancer3255.6 ± 11.5M: 25 (78.1); F: 7 (21.9)Oxaliplatin (XELOX)NCI-CTCAE18/14PlasmaqRT-PCR
Ju et al[38], 2024Prospective cohort
South KoreaColorectal cancer2762.4 ± 5.1M: 14 (51.9); F: 13 (48.1)Oxaliplatin (FOLFOX)NCI-CTCAE15/12PlasmaqRT-PCR
Łuczkowska et al[39], 2021Case-controlPolandMultiple myeloma6065.4 ± 8.31M: 39 (65); F: 21 (35)Bortezomib. VTD (n = 36) VMP (n = 8) VD (n = 3) VCD (n = 3) VRD (n = 1) RD (n = 10)NCI-CTCAE32/28PlasmaMicroarrays technique and qRT-PCR
Noda-Narita et al[40], 2020Retrospective cohortJapanBreast cancer84CIPN group: 54 (34-74); non-CIPN group: 46 (27-73)M: 0 (0); F: 84 (100)PaclitaxelNCI-CTCAE38/46PlasmaMicroarray hybridization
Table 2 New Castle Ottawa Scale for quality assessment of observational studies
Ref.Selection
Comparability
Outcome/exposure

Representative exposed cohort
Selection of non-exposed cohort
Ascertainment of exposure
Outcome of interest not present at baseline
Comparability of cohorts (design, analysis)
Outcome assessment
Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur?
Adequacy of follow-up
Quality
Davey et al[36], 2023-Good
Ju et al[37], 2022-Good
Ju et al[38], 2024-Good
Noda-Narita et al[40], 2020--Good
Case-control studiesCase definitionRepresentative casesControl selectionControl definition Comparability of cases and controls (design, analysis)Ascertainment of exposureAscertainment. Methods for cases and controlsNon-response rate
Łuczkowska et al[39], 2021-Good
Table 3 Differentially expressed microRNAs associated with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy and their predicted target genes and biological pathways
Ref.
miRNAs expression
Target genes
Biological pathways
Davey et al[36], 2023Let-7a: No difference; miR-21: No difference; miR-145: No difference; miR-155: No difference; miR-195: No differenceN/AN/A
Ju et al[37], 2022hsa-miR-885-5p: Downregulation; hsa-miR-378f: Downregulation; hsa-miR-200c-3p: Downregulation; hsa-miR-4666a-3p: DownregulationACACA, AKT1, MYRF, NDST1, KCNJ6, P4HB, RAP1B, REST, TGFB2, YY1, TXNL1, IGDCC3, WTAP, HIPK3, ZNF609, PRKD2, RDH11, LGSN, CAB39, SPA17, ARL8B, WDR33, RCC2, CELF4, CYP20A1, ESYT2, CACNG8, DCTPP1, HAUS3, VPS37B, LMNB2, PPARGC1B, DPY19 L3, ARGFXPeptidyl-serine phosphorylation. Regulation of alternative mRNA splicing. Gastric cancer signaling. Neurotrophin signaling. Mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling. Adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase signaling
Łuczkowska et al[39], 2021miRNA191-5p: Upregulation; miRNA23a-3p: Upregulation; miRNA24-3p: Upregulation; miRNA92: Upregulation; miRNA22: UpregulationNTRK2, NYAP2, ERBB3, SNAP91, ERBB4, GLDN, NFIB, HIPK1, WNT1, CDX2, CEBPD, TP53INP1, ESR1, EYA3, EZH1, PER1, MECOMNeuron apoptotic process. Neuron apoptosis. Neuronal stem cell maintenance. Neural tube closure. Regulation of intrinsic apoptotic signaling. Regulation of extrinsic apoptotic signaling. Apoptotic mitochondrial changes
Noda-Narita et al[40], 2020miR-451a: No difference; miR-6849-5p: No difference; miR-1290: No difference; miR-4476: No difference; miR-204-3p: No difference; miR-23a-3p: No difference; miR-6846-5p: No difference; miR-6870-5p: No difference; miR-5008-5p: No difference; miR-1249-5p: No difference; miR-6806-5p: No difference; miR-4718: No difference; miR-619-5p: No difference; miR-4462: No difference; miR-4539: No differenceN/AN/A
Table 4 Qualitative assessment of clinical and methodological heterogeneity across included studies
Ref.
Cancer type
Neurotoxic agent
Study design
CIPN definition/grading
Sample source
miRNA platform
Timing of sampling
Key source of heterogeneity
Davey et al[36], 2023Breast cancerPaclitaxelProspective cohortNCI-CTCAE (grade not stratified)Whole bloodqRT-PCR (predefined panel)During chemotherapyWhole blood vs plasma/serum; limited miRNA panel
Ju et al[37], 2022Gastric cancerOxaliplatin (XELOX)Prospective cohortNCI-CTCAE; cycle-based severityPlasmaSmall RNA sequencing + qRT-PCR validationAfter < 4 vs ≥ 4 cyclesCycle-based CIPN definition; sequencing-based discovery
Ju et al[38], 2024Colorectal cancerOxaliplatin (FOLFOX)Prospective cohortNCI-CTCAE; ≤ 3 vs ≥ 6 cyclesPlasmaRNA sequencing + qRT-PCR validationEarly vs late chemotherapy exposureDose/cycle-based stratification; stress biomarker integration
Łuczkowska et al[39], 2021Multiple myelomaBortezomib-based regimensCase-controlNCI-CTCAE (IMWG-adapted)PlasmaMicroarray + qRT-PCR validationDuring treatmentDifferent malignancy and neurotoxicity mechanism
Noda-Narita et al[40], 2020Breast cancerPaclitaxelRetrospective cohortNCI-CTCAE ≥ grade 2 vs ≤ 1SerumMicroarrayPre-treatmentDifferent grade threshold and retrospective design