ArticleEuropean journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)2013
A novel precision-engineered microfiltration device for capture and characterisation of bladder cancer cells in urine.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel DNA methylation biomarkers in urine for non-invasive diagnosis of bladder urothelial carcinoma.Clinical epigenetics · 2025Article
- The Application of Microfluidic Chips in Primary Urological Cancer: Recent Advances and Future Perspectives.Smart medicine · 2025Review
- Advances in the Biology, Detection Techniques, and Clinical Applications of Circulating Tumor Cells.Journal of oncology · 2022Review
- Novel Non-Invasive Diagnosis of Bladder Cancer in Urine Based on Multifunctional Nanoparticles.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Article
- Urine biopsy technologies: Cancer and beyond.Theranostics · 2020Review
- A Microfluidic Detection System for Bladder Cancer Tumor Cells.Micromachines · 2019Article
- Detection of Clinical Mesenchymal Cancer Cells from Bladder Wash Urine for Real-Time Detection and Prognosis.Cancers · 2019Article
- DNA-Methylation-Based Detection of Urological Cancer in Urine: Overview of Biomarkers and Considerations on Biomarker Design, Source of DNA, and Detection Technologies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Review
- Molecular substratification of bladder cancer: moving towards individualized patient management.Therapeutic advances in urology · 2016Review
- Article
- Size-based enrichment of exfoliated tumor cells in urine increases the sensitivity for DNA-based detection of bladder cancer.PloS one · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.