Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41955017›Full record

Trial reportThe Journal of clinical investigation2026

Large multicenter validation of urine RNA profile for urothelial carcinoma detection and surveillance.

Kathleen E Mach, Zachary Kornberg, Eugene Shkolyar, Jin Long, Timothy J Lee, Vinh La, Ihna Yoo, Gabriela Rodriguez, Alan E Thong, Kris B Prado and 4 more

Abstract readValidation StudyMulticenter StudyClinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Journal of clinical investigation, 2026. 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

14 authors.

Kathleen E MachDepartment of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Zachary KornbergDepartment of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Eugene ShkolyarDepartment of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Jin LongDepartment of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Timothy J LeeDepartment of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Vinh LaDepartment of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Ihna YooDepartment of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Gabriela RodriguezDepartment of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Alan E ThongDepartment of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Kris B PradoDepartment of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Jay B ShahDepartment of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
John T LeppertDepartment of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Eila C SkinnerDepartment of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Joseph C LiaoDepartment of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.

Funding

BLRD VA I01 BX004962
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUNDCurrent diagnosis and surveillance of bladder cancer rely on cystoscopy, which is invasive and user dependent. The urine mRNA panel, uRNAp, measures expression of 3 genes for identification of bladder cancer. Here we report validation of uRNAp for patients undergoing initial workup for suspected bladder cancer and surveillance for bladder cancer.METHODSUrine specimens were prospectively collected prior to cystoscopy at 2 health care systems from patients without (detection cohort) or with (surveillance cohort) a history of bladder cancer. RNA was isolated from urine sediment for RT-qPCR to determine roundabout guidance receptor 1, corticotropin releasing hormone, and insulin-like growth factor 2 expression and calculate the uRNAp bladder cancer probability score.RESULTSIn the detection cohort, 547 samples were collected from 529 patients. There were 123 new diagnoses of bladder cancer in the detection cohort, and uRNAp demonstrated 98% sensitivity and 51% specificity for identification of bladder cancer. In the surveillance cohort, 1,543 samples were collected from 447 patients with 286 recurrences. uRNAp demonstrated 94% overall sensitivity with 43% specificity and 99% sensitivity for high-grade recurrence. The receiver operating characteristic area under the curve was 0.92 in the detection and 0.81 in the surveillance cohort. uRNAp scores significantly increased with tumor size and grade.CONCLUSIONProspective validation of uRNAp demonstrated a strong potential clinical utility as a noninvasive adjunct to cystoscopy for management of bladder cancer. uRNAp may be a useful triage tool to defer or expedite cystoscopy for patients undergoing detection or surveillance of bladder cancer.FUNDINGDepartment of Veterans Affairs BLR&D Merit Review I01 BX004962 to JCL.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorRNA, MessengerRNA, NeoplasmUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesBiomarkers, TumorRNA, MessengerRNA, NeoplasmBiomarkersCancerClinical ResearchOncologyUrology

Identifiers

PMID41955017
PMCPMC13221218

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.