Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20648010›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2010

Diagnosis of prostate cancer by detection of minichromosome maintenance 5 protein in urine sediments.

T J Dudderidge, J D Kelly, A Wollenschlaeger, O Okoturo, T Prevost, W Robson, H Y Leung, G H Williams, K Stoeber

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02676180 (A Prospective Observational Study to Determine the Negative Predictive Value of UroMark to Rule Out the Presence of Bladder Cancer in Patients With Haematuria.), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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.

NCT02676180 completednot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

A Prospective Observational Study to Determine the Negative Predictive Value of UroMark to Rule Out the Presence of Bladder Cancer in Patients With Haematuria.

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorUniversity College, LondonRan2016 to 2017Enrolled3,700ConditionsBladder CancerArmsGroup
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

T J DudderidgeDepartment of Pathology and Cancer Institute, University College London, Rockefeller Building, 21 University Street, London, WC1E 6JJ, UK.
J D Kelly
A Wollenschlaeger
O Okoturo
T Prevost
W Robson
H Y Leung
G H Williams
K Stoeber
University College London · GBFreeman Hospital · GBImperial College London · GBNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G0900871
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe accuracy of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in prostate cancer detection is constrained by low sensitivity and specificity. Dysregulated expression of minichromosome maintenance (Mcm) 2-7 proteins is an early event in epithelial multistep carcinogenesis and thus MCM proteins represent powerful cancer diagnostic markers. In this study we investigate Mcm5 as a urinary biomarker for prostate cancer detection.

methodsUrine was obtained from 88 men with prostate cancer and from two control groups negative for malignancy. A strictly normal cohort included 28 men with complete, normal investigations, no urinary calculi and serum PSA <2 ng ml(-1). An expanded control cohort comprised 331 men with a benign final diagnosis, regardless of PSA level. Urine was collected before and after prostate massage in the cancer patient cohort. An immunofluorometric assay was used to measure Mcm5 levels in urine sediments.

resultsThe Mcm5 test detected prostate cancer with 82% sensitivity (confidence interval (CI)= 72-89%) and with a specificity ranging from 73 (CI=68-78%) to 93% (CI=76-99%). Prostate massage led to increased Mcm5 signals compared with pre-massage samples (median 3440 (interquartile range (IQR) 2280 to 5220) vs 2360 (IQR <1800 to 4360); P=0.009), and was associated with significantly increased diagnostic sensitivity (82 vs 60%; P=0.012).

conclusionsUrinary Mcm5 detection seems to be a simple, accurate and noninvasive method for identifying patients with prostate cancer. Large-scale prospective trials are now required to evaluate this test in diagnosis and screening.

Indexed as

AgedCell Cycle ProteinsFluoroimmunoassayHumansMaleMassagePilot ProjectsProstateProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsSensitivity and SpecificityCell Cycle ProteinsMCM5 protein, humanProstate-Specific Antigen

Identifiers

PMID20648010
PMCPMC2938246
OpenAlexW1992718241

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.