Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28938656›Full record

ArticleOncotarget2017

The prognostic and diagnostic value of circulating tumor cells in bladder cancer and upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a meta-analysis of 30 published studies.

Zheng Zhang, Wei Fan, Qiaoling Deng, Shihui Tang, Ping Wang, Peipei Xu, June Wang, Mingxia Yu

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Liquid biopsy in bladder cancer: towards precision oncology.Journal of translational medicine · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

8 authors.

Zheng ZhangDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430071, China.
Wei FanDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430071, China.
Qiaoling DengDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430071, China.
Shihui TangDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430071, China.
Ping WangDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430071, China.
Peipei XuDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430071, China.
June WangDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430071, China.
Mingxia YuDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430071, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are inconsistent conclusions in the association between circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and urothelial cancer (UC). We performed a meta-analysis to assess the prognostic and diagnostic value of CTCs in UC. We search Medline, Embase and Web of science for relevant studies. The study was set up according to the inclusion/exclusion criteria. 30 published studies with a total of 2161 urothelial cancer patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that CTC-positive was significantly associated with tumor stage (≤ II vs III, IV) (OR = 4.60, 95% CI: 2.34-9.03), histological grade (I, II vs III) (OR = 2.91, 95% CI: 1.92-4.40), metastasis (OR = 5.12, 95% CI: 3.47-7.55) and regional lymph node metastasis (OR = 2.47, 95% CI: 1.75-3.49). It was also significantly associated with poor overall survival (OS) (HR = 3.98, 95% CI: 2.20-7.21), progression/disease-free survival (PFS/DFS) (HR = 2.22, 95% CI: 1.80-2.73) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) (HR = 5.18, 95% CI: 2.21-12.13). Overall sensitivity and specificity of CTC detection assays were 0.35 (95% CI: 0.28-0.43) and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92-0.99) respectively. In summary, our meta-analysis suggests that the presence of CTCs in the peripheral blood is an independent predictive indicator of poor outcomes for urothelial cancer patients. It can also be used as a noninvasive method for the confirmation of cancer diagnosis. More studies are required to further explore the role of this marker in clinical practice.

Indexed as

bladder cancercirculating tumor cells (CTCs)meta-analysisprognosisurothelial cancer

Identifiers

PMID28938656
PMCPMC5601752

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.