SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2020
Diagnostic Value of Telomerase Activity in Patients With Bladder Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Gold Nanoparticles in Bladder Cancer Applications: A Paradigm Shift from Diagnostic Tools to Integrated Theranostic Platforms.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of telomerase activity (TA) for bladder cancer (BC) by meta-analysis.
methodsWe conducted a systematic search of studies published on PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science up to June 1, 2019. We used Stata 15 and Review Manager 5.3 for calculations and statistical analysis.
resultsTo evaluate the diagnostic value of TA for BC, we performed a meta-analysis on 22 studies, with a total of 2,867 individuals, including sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (PLR, NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The pooled parameters were calculated from all studies, and we found a sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.72-0.84), a specificity of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87-0.94), a PLR of 8.91 (95% CI: 5.91-13.43), an NLR of 0.24 (95% CI: 0.15-0.37), a DOR of 37.90 (95% CI: 23.32-61.59), and an AUC of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.90-0.94). We also conducted a subgroup analysis based on the different stages and grades of BC. Results from the subgroup analysis showed that there was no significant difference in TA in either high and low stages of BC, but that low-grade tumors had a lower TA than high-grade tumours.
conclusionsTA can be used as a potential biomarker for the diagnosis of bladder cancer with its high specificity. Rigorous and high-quality prospective studies are required to verify our conclusion.
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.