Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26046790›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2015

A comparison of NBI and WLI cystoscopy in detecting non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: A prospective, randomized and multi-center study.

Zhangqun Ye, Jia Hu, Xiaodong Song, Fan Li, Xuetao Zhao, Shan Chen, Xiaofeng Wang, Dalin He, Jinhai Fan, Dingwei Ye and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  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

13 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Zhangqun YeDepartment of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Jia HuDepartment of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Xiaodong SongDepartment of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Fan LiDepartment of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Xuetao ZhaoDepartment of Urology, Fourth Hospital of Wuhan, Wuhan 430030, P.R. China.
Shan ChenDepartment of Urology, Tongren Hospital, Peking 100730, P.R. China.
Xiaofeng WangDepartment of Urology, People's Hospital, Peking University, Peking 100044, P.R. China.
Dalin HeDepartment of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710061, P.R. China.
Jinhai FanDepartment of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710061, P.R. China.
Dingwei YeDepartment of Urology, Cancer Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, P.R. China.
Jinchun XingDepartment of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital, Xiamen University, Xiamen 361003, P.R. China.
Tiejun PanDepartment of Urology, Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Military Region, Wuhan 430000, P.R. China.
Dongwen WangDepartment of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital, Shanxi Medical University, Shanxi 030001, P.R. China.
First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University · CNHuazhong University of Science and Technology · CNTongji Hospital · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University · CNFudan University Shanghai Cancer Center · CNPeking University · CNShanxi Medical University · CNTongren Hospital · CNWuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several single-center studies have investigated whether narrow-band imaging (NBI) cystoscopy is more effective in detecting primary and recurrent non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) compared with white-light imaging (WLI) cystoscopy. In this study, we further evaluated the diagnostic value of NBI cystoscopy compared with WLI cystoscopy for primary NMIBC in a multi-center study. Suspected bladder cancer patients from 8 research centers received both NBI and WLI. Two experienced doctors in each center were responsible for the NBI and WLI assessments, respectively. The number of tumors and position of each tumor were recorded, and suspicious tissues were clamped and histologically examined. The sensitivity, specificity, and false-positive rate of NBI and WLI were evaluated. Of the 384 patients, 78 had a confirmed urothelial carcinoma (UC). The sensitivities of NBI and WLI were 97.70%, and 66.67%, respectively (P < 0.0001); the specificities were 50% and 25%, respectively; and the false positive rates were 50% and 75%, respectively. Based on 300 valid biopsy specimens, the NBI and WLI sensitivities were 98.80% and 75.45%, respectively (P < 0.0001). These results suggest that NBI has a high sensitivity and has superior early bladder tumor and carcinoma in situ (CIS) detection rates compared with WLI cystoscopy.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedCystoscopyFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26046790
PMCPMC4456941
OpenAlexW2267015430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.