Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40937226›Full record

ReviewCureus2025

Tropomyosin Isoforms as Biomarkers for Urothelial Bladder Cancer: Promise and Challenges.

Daniel Akintelure, Pelumi Tawose, Simon Akintelure, Regina Agada

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Daniel AkintelureUrology, Royal Gwent Hospital, Newport, GBR.
Pelumi TawoseTrauma and Orthopaedics, Royal Gwent Hospital, Newport, GBR.
Simon AkintelureMedicine, All Saints University School of Medicine, Roseau, DMA.
Regina AgadaMedicine, University of Warwick, Coventry, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tropomyosin (TPM) isoforms have been proposed as potential non-invasive biomarkers for urothelial bladder cancer (UBC) owing to their altered expression in tumors and detectability in urine. Some transcriptomic studies have reported a high diagnostic accuracy of approximately 0.85 area under the curve (AUC) for TPM1-3 as a standard in distinguishing UBC from normal tissue. However, critical evaluation has revealed several limitations, including insufficient clinical validation, isoform complexity, non-specific expression across cancer types, lack of mechanistic insights, and challenges in urinary detection. Current evidence regarding TPM relies largely on retrospective bioinformatics analyses of tumor RNA, such as The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), rather than validated clinical assays, raising concerns about generalizability. The TPM family is highly complex (four genes, >40 splice isoforms) with tissue-specific expression, and similar dysregulation occurs in other cancers, undermining its specificity for UBC. Crucially, no established assays exist for isoform-specific TPMs in urine, and urinary proteins can degrade if the samples are not handled properly. Therefore, although the findings are promising in concept, TPM isoforms lack rigorous clinical validation and technical feasibility to serve as standalone UBC biomarkers. This review systematically examines these concerns, highlighting the need for comprehensive research before TPM isoforms can be reliably employed as clinical biomarkers for UBC.

Indexed as

isoform switchingtranslation researchtropomyosinurinary biomarkersurothelial bladder cancer

Identifiers

PMID40937226
PMCPMC12422070

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.