ReviewBJUI compass2022
Utility of urinary biomarkers in primary haematuria: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in BJUI compass, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Urinary Biomarkers and Their Role in the Management of Urothelial Carcinoma: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Urinary bladder cancer needs more attention - recommendations for health care professionals and politicians in the European Union.Nature reviews. Urology · 2026Review
- Integrated Proteogenomic Approach for Discovering Potential Biomarkers in Urothelial Carcinoma of the Bladder.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Review
- Decreased Expression Levels Of PIWIL2, PIWIL3 and PIWIL4 Are Associated with Poor Prognosis and Worse Survival in Bladder Cancer Patients.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2025Article
- Current perspectives of urine-based tests for screening and post-treatment monitoring of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Article
- Unleashing the power of urine‑based biomarkers in diagnosis, prognosis and monitoring of bladder cancer (Review).International journal of oncology · 2025Review
- Diagnostic Performance of GeneXpert BC as a Triage Test for Patients Presenting with Macroscopic Hematuria Suspicious for Urinary Bladder Cancer: A Multicenter Prospective Case-Control Study.European urology open science · 2024Article
- Exploration of potential biomarkers for early bladder cancer based on urine proteomics.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Serum EZH2 is a novel biomarker for bladder cancer diagnosis and prognosis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of IGF2, KRT14, and KRT20 as Urinary Biomarkers in Patients with Bladder Cancer.Reports of biochemistry & molecular biology · 2023Article
- Shining a little light on peer review debates.BJUI compass · 2022Article
- Utility of urinary biomarkers in primary haematuria: Systematic review and meta-analysis.BJUI compass · 2022Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of FDA-approved urinary biomarkers in the evaluation of primary haematuria for investigation of bladder cancer. Methods: The scientific databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Pubmed and Web of Science were searched to collect studies. Studies that evaluated the diagnostic performance of FDA-approved urinary biomarkers in investigating patients with primary haematuria without a prior history of bladder cancer were included. Quality of studies was assessed using the JBI Criteria. Bivariate mixed-effects regression model was used to calculate pooled sensitivities and specificities for each biomarker. Results: Eighteen studies were included in the analysis. The biomarkers assessed in these studies were CxBladder, AssureMDx, Bladder Tumour Antigen (BTA), NMP22, UroVysion and Immunocyt/uCyt+. Several biomarkers, such as AssureMDx, CxBladder and Immunocyt, were shown to have better diagnostic performance based on their sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio, as well as positive and negative likelihood ratios. Across the six biomarkers, sensitivity ranged from 0.659 to 0.973, and the specificity ranged between 0.577 and 0.833. Conclusion: Despite certain biomarkers demonstrated better performance, current diagnostic abilities of the FDA-approved biomarkers remain insufficient for their general application as a rule out test for bladder cancer diagnosis and as a triage test for cystoscopy in patients with primary haematuria. High-quality prospective studies are required to further analyse this and also analyse the correct scenario in which urinary biomarkers may be best utilised.
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.