ArticleBMC microbiology2025
Urinary microbiome in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: impact of sample types and sex differences.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2025. 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.
- Adaptive graph learning of microbial phylogeny enables accurate and interpretable microbiome-based host phenotype prediction.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2026Article
- Urinary microbiota in bladder cancer: insights into pathogenesis, diagnosis, and therapeutic potential.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
- Mechanisms of microbiome-immune interactions in bladder cancer and targeted regulatory strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Research advances on the urinary microbiome in non-infectious urinary tract diseases: from community composition to clinical prospects.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevious research on urinary microbiomes in bladder cancer patients has yielded inconsistent results, highlighting the need for further investigation. This study aims to analyze microbiome dysbiosis in bladder cancer patients by comparing multiple sample types, incorporating negative controls, and assessing sex-based variations. Fifty patients who required transurethral resection of bladder tumor for treatment were selected. Three types of specimens were collected from each patient: midstream urine, catheterized urine, and normal bladder mucosal tissue. Microbiome was analyzed via 16 S rRNA gene amplificon sequencing.
resultsBeta diversity analysis revealed significant differences in microbiome composition between mucosal tissue and urine samples, while no significant variation was observed between midstream and catheterized urine samples. Due to the low biomass of mucosal tissue-characterized by dominance of a few taxa and high variability across extraction kit lots-its susceptibility to contamination compromised reproducibility, leading to a focus on urine samples for further analysis. Midstream urine samples showed significant sex-related microbiome differences, whereas catheterized urine exhibited no such differences, suggesting midstream urine may not be ideal for bladder-specific microbiome studies. Catheterized urine analysis identified Curvibacter, particularly Curvibacter gracilis, as significantly more abundant in bladder cancer patients compared to controls, while overall microbiome composition remained unchanged between the groups. Curvibacter prevalence was not directly correlated with any single clinical marker but increased with bladder cancer severity when patients were classified into high-risk and low-risk groups based on biopsy and clinical criteria.
conclusionsThis study highlights the importance of selecting appropriate sample types for bladder microbiome analysis, with catheterized urine emerging as the most reliable option. The findings suggest that Curvibacter may be associated with bladder cancer severity, warranting further investigation into its potential role as a biomarker. Future research should focus on validating these findings in larger cohorts and exploring the mechanistic link between microbiome alterations and bladder cancer progression.
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.