ArticleCancer medicine2023
Detection of the ADGRG6 hotspot mutations in urine for bladder cancer early screening by ARMS-qPCR.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Diagnostic Performance of a Four-Gene Digital Droplet PCR Panel for Urine Liquid Biopsy in Urothelial Bladder Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Urine-Based Biomarker Test UromonitorCancers · 2024Review
- Analysis of urine cell-free DNA in bladder cancer diagnosis by emerging bioactive technologies and materials.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
- Detection of the ADGRG6 hotspot mutations in urine for bladder cancer early screening by ARMS-qPCR.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
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
backgroundIn bladder cancer, recurrent ADGRG6 enhancer hotspot mutations (chr. 6: 142,706,206 G>A, chr. 6:142,706,209 C>T) were reported at a high mutation rate of approximately 50%. Thus, ADGRG6 enhancer mutation status might be a candidate for diagnostic biomarker.
methodsTo improve test efficacy, an amplification refractory mutation system combined with quantitative real-time PCR (ARMS-qPCR) assay was developed to detect the ADGRG6 mutations in a patient as a clinical diagnostic test. To validate the performance of the ARMS-qPCR assay, artificial plasmids, cell DNA reference standard were used as templates, respectively. To test the clinical diagnostic ability, we detected the cell free DNA (cfDNA) and sediment DNA (sDNA) of 30 bladder cancer patients' urine by ARMS-qPCR comparing with Sanger sequencing, followed by the droplet digital PCR to confirm the results. We also tested the urine of 100 healthy individuals and 90 patients whose diagnoses urinary tract infections or urinary stones but not bladder cancer.
resultsSensitivity of 100% and specificity of 96.7% were achieved when the mutation rate of the artificial plasmid was 1%, and sensitivity of 96.7% and specificity of 100% were achieved when the mutation frequency of the reference standard was 0.5%. Sanger sequencing and ARMS-qPCR both detected 30 cases of bladder cancer with 93.3% agreement. For the remaining unmatched sites, ARMS-qPCR results were consistent with droplet digital PCR. Among 100 healthy individuals, three of them carried hotspot mutations by way of ARMS-qPCR. Of 90 patients with urinary tract infections or urinary stones, no mutations were found by ARMS-qPCR. Based on clinical detection, the ARMS-qPCR assay's sensitivity is 83.3%, specificity is 98.4%.
conclusionWe here present a novel urine test for ADGRG6 hotspot mutations with high accuracy and sensitivity, which may potentially serve as a rapid and non-invasive tool for bladder cancer early screening and follow-up relapse monitoring.
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.