Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23764080›Full record

Trial reportThe Journal of urology2013

Multiplex protein signature for the detection of bladder cancer in voided urine samples.

Charles J Rosser, Shanti Ross, Myron Chang, Yunfeng Dai, Lourdes Mengual, Ge Zhang, Jeongsoon Kim, Virginia Urquidi, Antonio Alcaraz, Steve Goodison

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase II
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Journal of urology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Clinical Validation of a Multiplex Urine Biomarker Assay for Surveillance of Recurrent Bladder Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Charles J RosserNonagen Bioscience Corp., Orlando, Florida. Electronic address: deacdoc@aol.com.
Shanti Ross
Myron Chang
Yunfeng Dai
Lourdes Mengual
Ge Zhang
Jeongsoon Kim
Virginia Urquidi
Antonio Alcaraz
Steve Goodison
Universitat de Barcelona · ESUniversity of Florida · USNonagen Bioscience (United States) · 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

purposeAccurate urine assays for bladder cancer detection would benefit patients and health care systems. Through extensive genomic and proteomic profiling of urine components we previously identified a panel of 8 biomarkers that can facilitate the detection of bladder cancer in voided urine samples. In this study we confirmed this diagnostic molecular signature in a diverse multicenter cohort. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe performed a case-control, phase II study in which we analyzed voided urine from 102 subjects with bladder cancer and 206 with varying urological disorders. The urinary concentration of 8 biomarkers (IL-8, MMP-9 and 10, PAI-1, VEGF, ANG, CA9 and APOE) was assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Diagnostic performance of the panel of tested biomarkers was evaluated using ROCs and descriptive statistical values, eg sensitivity and specificity.

resultsSeven of the 8 urine biomarkers were increased in subjects with bladder cancer relative to those without bladder cancer. The 7 biomarkers were assessed in a new model, which had an AUROC of 0.88 (95% CI 0.84-0.93), and 74% sensitivity and 90% specificity. In contrast, the sensitivity of voided urine cytology and the UroVysion® cytogenetic test in this cohort was 39% and 54%, respectively. Study limitations include analysis performed on banked urine samples and the lack of voided urine cytology and cytogenetic test data on controls.

conclusionsThe study provides further evidence that the reported panel of diagnostic biomarkers can reliably achieve the noninvasive detection of bladder cancer with higher sensitivity than currently available urine based assays.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkersCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm ProteinsUrinalysisUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsYoung AdultBiomarkersNeoplasm ProteinsANGangiogeninAPOEapolipoprotein EBayesian information criterionBCaBICbiological markersbladder cancerCA9carbonic anhydrase 9diagnosisELISAenzyme-linked immunosorbent assayIL-8interleukin-8lower urinary tract symptomsLUTSmatrix metalloproteinaseMIBCMMPmolecular biologymuscle invasive BCaPAI-1plasminogen activator inhibitor 1urinary bladder neoplasmsurinevascular endothelial growth factorVEGFvoided urine cytologyVUC

Identifiers

PMID23764080
PMCPMC4013793
OpenAlexW1969120160

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.