SynthesisProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2022
Prostate cancer detection: a systematic review of urinary biosensors.
Synthesis in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Engineering Multimodal Nanomaterials for Prostate Cancer Theranostics: Design Principles, Recent Advances, and Translational Challenges.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Next-generation hybrid bioanalytical platforms and clinical integration of TDM technologies for precision monitoring to optimize last-resort antibiotic therapy.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- The association between urinary nitrate and prostate specific antigen without prostatic disease: a cohort study.BMC urology · 2025Article
- The Future of Tumor Markers: Advancing Early Malignancy Detection Through Omics Technologies, Continuous Monitoring, and Personalized Reference Intervals.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Non-invasive in vivo sensing of bacterial implant infection using catalytically-optimised gold nanocluster-loaded liposomes for urinary readout.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Article
- Challenges and Opportunities of Using Fluorescent Metal Nanocluster-Based Colorimetric Assays in Medicine.ACS omega · 2024Review
- Recent Advances in Skin-Interfaced Wearable Sweat Sensors: Opportunities for Equitable Personalized Medicine and Global Health Diagnostics.ACS sensors · 2023Review
- ExoDx test for prostate cancer: the future is liquid-Editorial Comment.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2023Article
- Cancer Stem Cells and Prostate Cancer: A Narrative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Recent advances in label-free optical, electrochemical, and electronic biosensors for glioma biomarkers.Biomicrofluidics · 2023Review
- Effects of Supplemental Drugs on Hexaminolevulinate (HAL)-Induced PpIX Fluorescence in Bladder Cancer Cell Suspensions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Monitoring Neurochemistry in Traumatic Brain Injury Patients Using Microdialysis Integrated with Biosensors: A Review.Metabolites · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrent diagnostic methods for prostate cancer are invasive and lack specificity towards aggressive forms of the disease, which can lead to overtreatment. A new class of non-invasive alternatives is under development, in which urinary biomarkers are detected using biosensing devices to offer rapid and accurate prostate cancer diagnosis. These different approaches are systematically reviewed and their potential for translation to clinical practice is evaluated.
methodsA systematic review of the literature was performed in May 2021 using PubMed Medline database, Embase, and Web of Science. The objective was to review the structural designs and performance of biosensors tested on urine samples from patients with prostate cancer.
resultsA total of 76 records were identified. After screening and eligibility, 14 articles were included and are discussed in this paper. The biosensors were discussed based on the target biomarkers and detection technologies used, as well as the results of the clinical studies. Most of the works reported good discrimination between patients with prostate cancer and controls.
conclusionsThis review highlights the potential of urinary biosensors for non-invasive prostate cancer detection. However, clinical studies have so far only been conducted on small cohorts of patient, with large scale trials still needed to validate the proposed approaches. Overall, the consensus arising from the proof of concepts studies reviewed here, is that an adequate combination of biomarkers into multiplex biosensor platforms is required to achieve accurate diagnostic tests. Furthermore, whether such devices can discriminate between aggressive and indolent cancer has not yet been addressed, because it entails optimized biomarkers panels and long-term clinical trials.
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.