SynthesisBMC cancer2025
Renal cell carcinoma detection: a systematic review in diagnostic urinary biomarkers.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Urinary Biomarkers in Urological Oncology: From Biological Origin to Clinical Decision-Making-A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review
- From feasibility to translational pathways: a bibliometric and knowledge-mapping analysis of urine-based liquid biopsy in urologic cancers (2015-2025).Journal of translational medicine · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRenal cell carcinoma (RCC) accounts for 90% of all renal neoplasms and is often incidentally detected through unrelated imaging procedures. Differentiating between benign and malignant renal masses remains challenging using imaging alone. Urinary biomarkers may aid in this distinction, yet none are currently implemented in the clinic. Moreover, a comprehensive overview of urinary diagnostic biomarkers for RCC is lacking. Therefore, we aimed to systematically review and summarize existing literature on potential urinary biomarkers with diagnostic properties for RCC.
methodsPubMed, Scopus and Web of Science were used for the identification of eligible studies evaluating urinary biomarkers in adults with sporadic RCC which reported diagnostic properties compared to controls groups. Standardized data extraction was performed. Risk of bias of was assessed by using a modified STROBE 22-items checklist for observational studies.
resultsIn total 136 articles were identified through database search, four via a previous review and 19 through cross-referencing. After screening, 46 articles were included, identifying 105 individual biomarkers: metabolites (n = 40), proteins (n = 29), miRNAs (n = 12), DNA methylation markers (n = 13) and others (n = 11). Additionally, 29 multi-biomarker panels were described. Promising diagnostic markers (AUC ≥ 0.80) included dysregulated energy metabolism markers, proteins AQP1 and PLIN2, and miRNAs; miR-122-5p, miR-15a and miR-30c, however validation is severely lacking.
conclusionsVarious urinary biomarkers for RCC show promising diagnostic potential. The diagnostic ability of multi-biomarker panels often exceeded those of individual markers. However, individual markers and panels require external validation before clinical implementation.
trial registrationThis systematic review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023474582), and was designed and written based on the PRISMA guidelines.
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.