ArticleClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research2026
Clinical Validation of a Multiplex Urine Biomarker Assay for Surveillance of Recurrent Bladder Cancer.
Article in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMore than 50% of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer experience recurrence, requiring lifelong surveillance with repeated cystoscopy. Given the invasive nature and cost of cystoscopy, accurate noninvasive tools are needed to support risk-adapted monitoring. We evaluated the ability of Oncuria-Monitor, a multiplex urine biomarker assay, to detect recurrent bladder cancer during surveillance. PATIENTS AND
methodsBetween February 2017 and August 2020, six medical centers in the United States and Japan prospectively enrolled 300 patients with a history of bladder cancer, generating 1,248 serial urine samples. Participants were divided into training and validation cohorts. At each surveillance visit over 2 years, urine samples were analyzed in a blinded manner using Oncuria-Monitor and BladderChek, alongside urine cytology. Test performance was compared with cystoscopy and histopathology-confirmed recurrence.
resultsRecurrent bladder cancer was identified in 31% (93/300) of participants, with 143 total recurrences during follow-up, including 90 tumors in the validation cohort. In the validation cohort, Oncuria-Monitor achieved a sensitivity of 85.6% [95% confidence interval (CI), 78.1%-92.2%] and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 93% (95% CI, 89.2%-96.4%). In comparison, BladderChek demonstrated a sensitivity of 20.0% and an NPV of 88%, whereas urine cytology showed a sensitivity of 36.9% and an NPV of 91.6%. The number needed to evaluate to detect one recurrence was 3 for both cystoscopy and Oncuria-Monitor, compared with 15 for BladderChek and 8 for cytology.
conclusionsIn this large prospective longitudinal study, Oncuria-Monitor demonstrated clinically actionable performance, enabling a rule-out strategy that could safely reduce cystoscopy in approximately 25% of surveillance visits. These findings support a paradigm shift toward biomarker-guided, risk-adapted surveillance in bladder cancer that reduces unnecessary invasive procedures while maintaining oncologic safety.
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.