Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40282460›Full record

ReviewCancers2025

Novel Urinary Biomarkers for the Detection of Bladder Cancer.

Matthijs Oyaert, Charles Van Praet, Charlotte Delrue, Marijn M Speeckaert

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. UrinaryTranslational andrology and urology · 2026
    Article
  8. Serum Trimethylamine-International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. 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

4 authors.

Matthijs OyaertDepartment of Clinical Biology, Ghent University Hospital, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-0240-0679
Charles Van PraetDepartment of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4467-0829
Charlotte DelrueDepartment of Nephrology, Ghent University Hospital, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
Marijn M SpeeckaertDepartment of Nephrology, Ghent University Hospital, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9183-4390

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bladder cancer (BCa) is a highly recurrent malignancy that requires sensitive and noninvasive diagnostic and predictive markers. Conventional diagnostic tools, such as cystoscopy and urine cytology, are far from ideal in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and patient compliance. In this narrative review, the development of novel urinary markers for the diagnosis of BCa is highlighted, with a focus on their application in the clinical arena, detection accuracy, and future potential. An extensive analysis of new urinary biomarkers, including proteinuria-based tests, DNA methylation biomarkers, and RNA-based molecular panels, has been conducted. Various molecular tests, such as Cxbladder

Indexed as

bladder cancerepigeneticsliquid biopsymachine learningmolecular diagnosticsmulti-omicsurinary biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID40282460
PMCPMC12025552

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.