Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35968916›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational medicine2022

Non-invasive diagnosis and surveillance of bladder cancer with driver and passenger DNA methylation in a prospective cohort study.

Yu Xiao, Lingao Ju, Kaiyu Qian, Wan Jin, Gang Wang, Yan Zhao, Wei Jiang, Nan Liu, Kai Wu, Minsheng Peng and 29 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Brain Tumor Classification by Methylation Profile.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023
    Review
  17. Epigenetic and Immunological Features of Bladder Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  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

39 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.

Yu XiaoDepartment of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1377-9685
Lingao JuHuman Genetic Resource Preservation Center of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China.
Kaiyu QianDepartment of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Wan JinDepartment of Biological Repositories, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Gang WangWuhan Research Center for Infectious Diseases and Cancer, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Wuhan, China.
Yan ZhaoEmergency Center, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Wei JiangMedical Research Institute, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Nan LiuHuman Genetic Resource Preservation Center of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China.
Kai WuEuler Technology, ZGC Life Science Park, Beijing, China.
Minsheng PengState Key Laboratory of Genetic Resources and Evolution, Kunming Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming, China.
Rui CaoDepartment of Urology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Sheng LiHuman Genetic Resource Preservation Center of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4070-7345
Hongjie ShiHuman Genetic Resource Preservation Center of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China.
Yan GongDepartment of Biological Repositories, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4805-0459
Hang ZhengDepartment of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Tongzu LiuDepartment of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Yongwen LuoDepartment of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8724-6550
Haoli MaDepartment of Biological Repositories, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Luyuan ChangEuler Technology, ZGC Life Science Park, Beijing, China.
Gang LiHuman Genetic Resource Preservation Center of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China.
Xinyue CaoClinical Trial Center, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Ye TianDepartment of Urology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Zilin XuHuman Genetic Resource Preservation Center of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China.
Zhonghua YangDepartment of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Liuying ShanEuler Technology, ZGC Life Science Park, Beijing, China.
Zhongqiang GuoDepartment of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Dongai YaoPhysical Examination Center, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Xianlong ZhouEmergency Center, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Xintong ChenEuler Technology, ZGC Life Science Park, Beijing, China.
Zicheng GuoDepartment of Urology, The Central Hospital of Enshi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefecture, Enshi, China.
Dongmei LiuEuler Technology, ZGC Life Science Park, Beijing, China.
Song XuDepartment of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Chundong JiDepartment of Urology, The Affiliated Hospital of Panzhihua University, Panzhihua, China.
Fang YuDepartment of Pathology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Xin HongDepartment of Urology, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing, China.
Jun LuoDepartment of Pathology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Hong CaoDepartment of Pathology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Yi ZhangEuler Technology, ZGC Life Science Park, Beijing, China.
Xinghuan WangDepartment of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3497-0024
Wuhan University · CNGenetic Resources Center · JPScience & Technology Park (Czechia) · CZCapital Medical University · CNKunming University · CNPanzhihua University · CNPeking University · CNWuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundState-of-art non-invasive diagnosis processes for bladder cancer (BLCA) harbour shortcomings such as low sensitivity and specificity, unable to distinguish between high- (HG) and low-grade (LG) tumours, as well as inability to differentiate muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) and non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). This study investigates a comprehensive characterization of the entire DNA methylation (DNAm) landscape of BLCA to determine the relevant biomarkers for the non-invasive diagnosis of BLCA.

methodsA total of 304 samples from 224 donors were enrolled in this multi-centre, prospective cohort study. BLCA-specific DNAm signature discovery was carried out with genome-wide bisulfite sequencing in 32 tumour tissues and 12 normal urine samples. A targeted sequencing assay for BLCA-specific DNAm signatures was developed to categorize tumour tissue against normal urine, or MIBC against NMIBC. Independent validation was performed with targeted sequencing of 259 urine samples in a double-blinded manner to determine the clinical diagnosis and prognosis value of DNAm-based classification models. Functions of genomic region harbouring BLCA-specific DNAm signature were validated with biological assays. Concordances of pathology to urine tumour DNA (circulating tumour DNA [ctDNA]) methylation, genomic mutations or other state-of-the-art diagnosis methods were measured.

resultsGenome-wide DNAm profile could accurately classify LG tumour from HG tumour (LG NMIBC vs. HG NMIBC: p = .038; LG NMIBC vs. HG MIBC, p = .00032; HG NMIBC vs. HG MIBC: p = .82; Student's t-test). Overall, the DNAm profile distinguishes MIBC from NMIBC and normal urine. Targeted-sequencing-based DNAm signature classifiers accurately classify LG NMIBC tissues from HG MIBC and could detect tumours in urine at a limit of detection of less than .5%. In tumour tissues, DNAm accurately classifies pathology, thus outperforming genomic mutation or RNA expression profiles. In the independent validation cohort, pre-surgery urine ctDNA methylation outperforms fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assay to detect HG BLCA (n = 54) with 100% sensitivity (95% CI: 82.5%-100%) and LG BLCA (n = 26) with 62% sensitivity (95% CI: 51.3%-72.7%), both at 100% specificity (non-BLCA: n = 72; 95% CI: 84.1%-100%). Pre-surgery urine ctDNA methylation signature correlates with pathology and predicts recurrence and metastasis. Post-surgery urine ctDNA methylation (n = 61) accurately predicts recurrence-free survival within 180 days, with 100% accuracy.

conclusionWith the discovery of BLCA-specific DNAm signatures, targeted sequencing of ctDNA methylation outperforms FISH and DNA mutation to detect tumours, predict recurrence and make prognoses.

Indexed as

Circulating Tumor DNAUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorDNA MethylationHumansIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceProspective StudiesBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNAbladder cancerdiagnosis and prognosismethylationnon-invasive screeningprospective cohort studyurine tumour DNA

Identifiers

PMID35968916
PMCPMC9377153
OpenAlexW4291899083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.