Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23479428›Full record

ReviewMolecular diagnosis & therapy2013

Bladder cancer detection and monitoring: assessment of urine- and blood-based marker tests.

Steve Goodison, Charles J Rosser, Virginia Urquidi

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular diagnosis & therapy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
10.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 123 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. RASSF1A and its epigenetic dysregulation in genitourinary cancer: a current update.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Steve GoodisonCancer Research Institute, MD Anderson Cancer Center Orlando, 6900 Lake Nona Blvd, Orlando, FL 32827, USA. steven.goodison@orlandohealth.com
Charles J Rosser
Virginia Urquidi
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USOrlando Health · US

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, but the treatment and management of this disease can be very successful if the disease is detected early. The development of molecular assays that could diagnose bladder cancer accurately, and at an early stage, would be a significant advance. Ideally, such molecular assays would be applicable to non-invasively obtained body fluids, and be designed not only for diagnosis but also for monitoring disease recurrence and response to treatment. In this article, we assess the performance of current diagnostic assays for bladder cancer and discuss some of the emerging biomarkers that could be developed to augment current bladder cancer detection strategies.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorHumansUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID23479428
PMCPMC3627848
OpenAlexW1991553664

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.