SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2024
Diagnostic accuracy of cytology and urine methylation test in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Diagnostic potential of urinaryTranslational andrology and urology · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Multiple clinical studies have demonstrated the numerous advantages of urine methylation test over cytology for monitoring patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) following surgery. This research aims to provide a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and limits of urine methylation test in the clinical management of NMIBC. Methods: This research was carried out by conducting a comprehensive search of clinical trials comparing cytology and urine methylation test for NMIBC follow-up using databases such as PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up until May 2023, including references from relevant articles. The study is registered on PROSPERO with ID CRD42023398969. Result: This study comprised six studies with a total of 1676 patients. The analysis revealed that the AUC of urine methylation test had a greater AUC than that of the cytology examination (0.89 vs 0.71). In post-operative follow-up of patients with NMIBC, the urine methylation test demonstrated a significant sensitivity (0.69 vs 0.52), but with lower specificity (0.87 vs 0.93) than cytology examination. Conclusion: The urine methylation test and cytology examination have both shown strong diagnostic performance in screening for NMIBC patients. However, urine methylation test outperforms cytology examination in terms of accuracy and sensitivity. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, identifier CRD42023398969.
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.