Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30003675›Full record

Observational studyBJU international2019

Does urinary cytology have a role in haematuria investigations?

Wei Shen Tan, Rachael Sarpong, Pramit Khetrapal, Simon Rodney, Hugh Mostafid, Joanne Cresswell, Dawn Watson, Abhay Rane, James Hicks, Giles Hellawell and 9 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BJU international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02676180 (A Prospective Observational Study to Determine the Negative Predictive Value of UroMark to Rule Out the Presence of Bladder Cancer in Patients With Haematuria.), which is not on this map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

NCT02676180 completednot on this map

A Prospective Observational Study to Determine the Negative Predictive Value of UroMark to Rule Out the Presence of Bladder Cancer in Patients With Haematuria.

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorUniversity College, LondonRan2016 to 2017Enrolled3,700ConditionsBladder CancerArmsGroup
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Urinary Analysis ofThe Journal of urology · 2023
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Keratin 17 is a sensitive and specific biomarker of urothelial neoplasia.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2019
    Article
  18. 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

19 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.

Wei Shen TanDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Rachael SarpongSurgical and Interventional Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK.
Pramit KhetrapalDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Simon RodneyDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Hugh MostafidDepartment of Urology, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK.
Joanne CresswellDepartment of Urology, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK.
Dawn WatsonDepartment of Urology, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK.
Abhay RaneDepartment of Urology, East Surrey Hospital, Redhill, UK.
James HicksDepartment of Urology, Worthing Hospital, Worthing, UK.
Giles HellawellDepartment of Urology, Northwick Park Hospital, London, UK.
Melissa DaviesDepartment of Urology, Salisbury District Hospital, Salisbury, UK.
Shalom J SrirangamDepartment of Urology, East Lancashire Hospital, Blackburn, UK.
Louise DawsonDepartment of Urology, Royal Bolton Hospital, Bolton, UK.
David PayneDepartment of Urology, Kettering General Hospital, Kettering, UK.
Norman WilliamsSurgical and Interventional Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK.
Chris Brew-GravesSurgical and Interventional Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK.
Andrew FeberDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
John D KellyDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
DETECT I trial collaborators
University College London · GBJames Cook University Hospital · GBUniversity College Hospital · GBEast Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust · GBEast Surrey Hospital · GBKettering General Hospital · GBNorthwick Park Hospital · GBRoyal Bolton Hospital · GBRoyal Surrey County Hospital · GBSalisbury District Hospital · GBWorthing Hospital · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/M025411/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of urinary cytology to diagnose bladder cancer and upper tract urothelial cancer (UTUC) as well as the outcome of patients with a positive urine cytology and normal haematuria investigations in patients in a multicentre prospective observational study of patients investigated for haematuria. PATIENT AND

methodsThe DETECT I study (clinicaltrials.gov NCT02676180) recruited patients presenting with haematuria following referral to secondary case at 40 hospitals. All patients had a cystoscopy and upper tract imaging (renal bladder ultrasound [RBUS] and/ or CT urogram [CTU]). Patients, where urine cytology were performed, were sub-analysed. The reference standard for the diagnosis of bladder cancer and UTUC was histological confirmation of cancer. A positive urine cytology was defined as a urine cytology suspicious for neoplastic cells or atypical cells.

resultsOf the 3 556 patients recruited, urine cytology was performed in 567 (15.9%) patients from nine hospitals. Median time between positive urine cytology and endoscopic tumour resection was 27 (IQR: 21.3-33.8) days. Bladder cancer was diagnosed in 39 (6.9%) patients and UTUC in 8 (1.4%) patients. The accuracy of urinary cytology for the diagnosis of bladder cancer and UTUC was: sensitivity 43.5%, specificity 95.7%, positive predictive value (PPV) 47.6% and negative predictive value (NPV) 94.9%. A total of 21 bladder cancers and 5 UTUC were missed. Bladder cancers missed according to grade and stage were as follows: 4 (19%) were ≥ pT2, 2 (9.5%) were G3 pT1, 10 (47.6%) were G3/2 pTa and 5 (23.8%) were G1 pTa. High-risk cancer was confirmed in 8 (38%) patients. There was a marginal improvement in sensitivity (57.7%) for high-risk cancers. When urine cytology was combined with imaging, the diagnostic performance improved with CTU (sensitivity 90.2%, specificity 94.9%) superior to RBUS (sensitivity 66.7%, specificity 96.7%). False positive cytology results were confirmed in 22 patients, of which 12 (54.5%) had further invasive tests and 5 (22.7%) had a repeat cytology. No cancer was identified in these patients during follow-up.

conclusionsUrine cytology will miss a significant number of muscle-invasive bladder cancer and high-risk disease. Our results suggest that urine cytology should not be routinely performed as part of haematuria investigations. The role of urine cytology in select cases should be considered in the context of the impact of a false positive result leading to further potentially invasive tests conducted under general anaesthesia.

Indexed as

AgedCarcinoma, Transitional CellFalse Negative ReactionsFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleHematuriaHumansKidney NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm StagingPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedUltrasonographybiomarker#BladderCancer#blcsmcytologydiagnosishaematuriainvestigationsurine#utuc

Identifiers

PMID30003675
PMCPMC6334509
OpenAlexW2884611506

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.