ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2018
No influence of smoking status on the performance of urine markers for the detection of bladder cancer.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- New Perspectives on the Role of Liquid Biopsy in Bladder Cancer: Applicability to Precision Medicine.Cancers · 2024Review
- Urinary micro-RNA expressions and protein concentrations may differentiate bladder cancer patients from healthy controls.International urology and nephrology · 2020Article
- Urinary Markers in Bladder Cancer: An Update.Frontiers in oncology · 2018Review
- Proteomic research and diagnosis in bladder cancer: state of the art review.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe performance of urinary markers for detecting bladder cancer (BC) is influenced by various factors. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the influence of smoking habits on the performance of four commonly used urine markers.
methodsUrine samples of 723 patients with suspected BC were analysed using urine cytology, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), immunocytology (uCyt+ test), and quantitative nuclear matrix protein 22 (NMP22) immunoassay. The smoking habits of all patients were recorded and a cystoscopy performed within 2 weeks after urinary marker testing. Rates of false negative and false positive results were compared between non-smokers, former smokers, and current smokers by contingency analyses.
resultsWe included 723 patients in this study, 431 (59.6%) of which were non-smokers, 215 former smokers (29.7%), and 77 (10.7%) current smokers. 148 patients (20.5%) had a tumour at the time of urinary marker testing. Respective rates of false positive test results among non-smokers, former smokers, and current smokers were: 16.3, 19.1, and 11.5% (p = 0.81) for urine cytology; 36.8, 42.0, and 32.7% for the uCyt+ test (p = 0.88); 18.0, 19.1, and 13.5% for FISH (p = 0.66); and 69.5, 71.6, and 71.2% for NMP22 (p = 0.67). Respective rates of false negatives among non-smokers, former smokers, and current smokers were: 31.4, 15.1, and 28.0% for cytology (p = 0.34); 21.4, 22.6, and 16.0% for uCyt+ test (p = 0.67); 24.3, 13.2, and 28.0% for FISH (p = 0.88); and 10.0, 18.9, and 8.0% for NMP22 (p = 0.80).
conclusionsOur results strongly suggest that smoking habits do not affect performance characteristics of urinary markers in the diagnostics of BC.
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.