Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23849827›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)2013

A novel precision-engineered microfiltration device for capture and characterisation of bladder cancer cells in urine.

Marc Birkhahn, Anirban P Mitra, Anthony J Williams, Nancy J Barr, Eila C Skinner, John P Stein, Donald G Skinner, Yu-Chong Tai, Ram H Datar, Richard J Cote

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Marc BirkhahnUrologie am Ring, Kaiser Wilhelm Ring 36, Cologne, Germany.
Anirban P Mitra
Anthony J Williams
Nancy J Barr
Eila C Skinner
John P Stein
Donald G Skinner
Yu-Chong Tai
Ram H Datar
Richard J Cote
University of Southern California · USMiami University · USCalifornia Institute of Technology · USDeutsche Gesellschaft für Urologie · DEStanford University · USUniversity of Miami · US

Funding

Integrated Microdevice to Capture and Detect Circulating Tumor CellsR33CA123027 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI COTE, RICHARD JAMES · 2010 to 2011
$1.1M
NCI NIH HHS R33 CA123027NCI NIH HHS R33-CA-123027
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSensitivity of standard urine cytology for detecting urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB) is low, attributable largely to its inability to process entire samples, paucicellularity and presence of background cells.

objectiveEvaluate performance and practical applicability of a novel portable microfiltration device for capture, enumeration and characterisation of exfoliated tumour cells in urine, and compare it with standard urine cytology for UCB detection.

methodsA total of 54 urine and bladder wash samples from patients undergoing surveillance for UCB were prospectively evaluated by standard and microfilter-based urine cytology. Head-to-head comparison of quality and performance metrics, and cost effectiveness was conducted for both methodologies.

resultsFive samples were paucicellular by standard cytology; no samples processed by microfilter cytology were paucicellular. Standard cytology had 33.3% more samples with background cells that limited evaluation (p<0.001). Microfilter cytology was more concordant (κ=50.4%) than standard cytology (κ=33.5%) with true UCB diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were higher for microfilter cytology compared to standard cytology (53.3%/100%/79.2% versus 40%/95.8%/69.9%, respectively). Microfilter-captured cells were amenable to downstream on-chip molecular analyses. A 40 ml sample was processed in under 4 min by microfilter cytology compared to 5.5 min by standard cytology. Median microfilter cytology processing and set-up costs were approximately 63% cheaper and 80 times lower than standard cytology, respectively.

conclusionsThe microfiltration device represents a novel non-invasive UCB detection system that is economical, rapid, versatile and has potentially better quality and performance metrics than routine urine cytology, the current standard-of-care.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorCytodiagnosisEarly Detection of CancerFemaleFiltrationHumansMaleMiddle AgedNanotechnologyProspective StudiesUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorBladder cancerNanotechnologyScreeningSurveillanceUrine cytology

Identifiers

PMID23849827
PMCPMC3787946
OpenAlexW2090020718

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.