Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20161673›Full record

ArticleBiomarkers in medicine2009

Urine-based assays for the detection of bladder cancer.

Patrick Villicana, Bryant Whiting, Steve Goodison, Charles J Rosser

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Biomarkers in medicine, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Urinary Markers for Bladder Cancer Diagnosis and Monitoring.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. A candidate molecular biomarker panel for the detection of bladder cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2012
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

4 authors.

Patrick VillicanaDepartment of Urology, The University of Florida, College of Medicine, Suite N2-3, PO Box 100247, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.
Bryant Whiting
Steve Goodison
Charles J Rosser

Funding

Towards a non-invasive molecular test for bladder cancerR01CA116161 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI GOODISON, STEVE · 2007 to 2019
$2.9M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA116161
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bladder cancer is one of the most prevalent cancers worldwide. Furthermore, nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer has a 70% rate of recurrence, making it a considerable strain to the healthcare system. Patients with bladder cancer require repeat cystoscopic examinations of the bladder to monitor for tumor recurrence. The reason these patients have to undergo these costly, painful, invasive procedures is owing to the absence of accurate urine-based assays to detect the presence of bladder cancer noninvasively. Consequently, the development of a urine-based test to detect bladder cancer would be of tremendous benefit to both patients and healthcare systems. This article reports some of the more prominent urine markers in use today. In addition, the article will highlight some new technologies that are used to investigate novel urinary markers.

Identifiers

PMID20161673
PMCPMC2819730

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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 OpenQuestion graph.