Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26032553›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Urology2015

Developing proteomic biomarkers for bladder cancer: towards clinical application.

Maria Frantzi, Agnieszka Latosinska, Leif Flühe, Marie C Hupe, Elena Critselis, Mario W Kramer, Axel S Merseburger, Harald Mischak, Antonia Vlahou

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Molecular Pathways of Diabetic Kidney Disease Inferred from Proteomics.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Identifying the mRNAs associated with Bladder cancer recurrence.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Maria FrantziBiotechnology Division, Biomedical Research Foundation Academy of Athens, 4 Soranou Ephessiou Street, 115 27 Athens, Greece.
Agnieszka LatosinskaBiotechnology Division, Biomedical Research Foundation Academy of Athens, 4 Soranou Ephessiou Street, 115 27 Athens, Greece.
Leif FlüheMosaiques Diagnostics GmbH, Rotenburger Strasse 20, 30659 Hannover, Germany.
Marie C HupeDepartment of Urology and Urological Oncology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany.
Elena CritselisBiotechnology Division, Biomedical Research Foundation Academy of Athens, 4 Soranou Ephessiou Street, 115 27 Athens, Greece.
Mario W KramerDepartment of Urology and Urological Oncology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany.
Axel S MerseburgerDepartment of Urology and Urological Oncology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany.
Harald MischakBHF Glasgow Cardiovascular Research Centre, University of Glasgow, 126 University Avenue, Glasgow G12 8TA, UK.
Antonia VlahouBiotechnology Division, Biomedical Research Foundation Academy of Athens, 4 Soranou Ephessiou Street, 115 27 Athens, Greece.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical use of proteomic biomarkers has the potential to substantially improve the outcomes of patients with bladder cancer. An unmet clinical need evidently exists for noninvasive biomarkers, which might enable improvements in both the diagnosis and prognosis of patients with bladder cancer, as well as improved monitoring of patients for the presence of recurrence. Urine is considered the optimal noninvasive source of proteomic biomarkers in patients with bladder cancer. Currently, a number of single-protein biomarkers have been detected in urine and tissue using a variety of proteomic techniques, each having specific conceptual considerations and technical implications. Promising preclinical data are available for several of these proteins; however, the combination of single urinary proteins into multimarker panels might better encompass the molecular heterogeneity of bladder cancer within this patient population, and prove more effective in clinical use.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorCalgranulin AComputational BiologyCystoscopyElectrophoresisHumansImmunohistochemistryMass SpectrometryNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalProteomicsUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorCalgranulin A

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.