Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34348469›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of urology2021

The Diagnostic Performance of Cxbladder Resolve, Alone and in Combination with Other Cxbladder Tests, in the Identification and Priority Evaluation of Patients at Risk for Urothelial Carcinoma.

Jay D Raman, Laimonis Kavalieris, Badrinath Konety, Sima Porten, Siamak Daneshmand, Yair Lotan, Ronald Loo

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Analytical Validation of CxbladderDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Clinical Validation of the Proenkephalin (European urology open science · 2024
    Article
  11. Potential of an mRNA-Based Urine Assay (XpertBladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024
    Article
  12. Urinary Analysis ofThe Journal of urology · 2023
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Jay D RamanPenn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania.
Laimonis KavalierisPacific Edge Ltd, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Badrinath KonetyRush Medical College, Chicago, Illinois.
Sima PortenDepartment of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Siamak DaneshmandUSC Department of Urology, USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.
Yair LotanDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Ronald LooKaiser Permanente, Pasadena, California.
Kaiser Permanente · USPenn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center · USRush University Medical Center · USThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeCxbladder (Cxb) tests combine genomic biomarkers in urine with phenotypic and clinical data to classify hematuria patients into those at low/high probability of urothelial carcinoma (UC). Cxbladder Resolve (CxbR) is designed for use after Cxb Triage (CxbT) and Detect (CxbD), where CxbT-positive tests reflex to CxbD and CxbD-positive to CxbR to identify patients at high probability of high-impact tumors (HIT; high grade Ta, Tis or T1-T3). This study validated the diagnostic performance of CxbR in identifying HIT, and validated the algorithm of Cxb tests to segregate high-impact from low-impact tumors. MATERIALS AND

methodsCxbR was developed in 863 hematuria patients in 3 studies in United States, Australia and New Zealand. CxbR, separately and combined with other Cxb tests, was validated in a prospective, observational U.S. study in 548 hematuria patients. All UC diagnoses were confirmed by histopathology.

resultsIn the development data set, CxbR sensitivity was 92.4% (95% CI 83.3-96.7) and specificity 93.8% (95% CI 86.8-97.2) for identifying HIT within the high priority category. During external validation, sequential Cxb tests correctly ruled out 87.6% of patients from further workup (negative predictive value 99.4%); 100% of HIT were correctly identified (specificity 96.3%), and 3 low-grade tumors were missed. In both studies, all patients with HIT were correctly assigned to prioritized evaluation.

conclusionsCxbR has high sensitivity and specificity, correctly identifying all HIT. Sequential Cxb tests accurately segregate patients with a low vs high probability of HIT, focusing resources on those patients, with a diagnostic yield 4.8-fold higher than American Urological Association guideline stratification.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, Transitional CellFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentUrinalysisUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsYoung AdultBiomarkers, Tumorbiomarkershematuriapredictive value of testssensitivity and specificityurinary bladder neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID34348469
PMCPMC8584223
OpenAlexW3189706775

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.