We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Tumor markers in the diagnosis of primary bladder cancer. A systematic review.
Journal of Urology 2003 June
PURPOSE: We systematically reviewed the available evidence, and obtained and compared summary estimates of the sensitivity and specificity of cytology and the urine based markers bladder tumor antigen, BTA stat (Polymedco, Redmond, Washington), BTA TRAK (Polymedco), NMP22 (Matritech, Cambridge, Massachusetts), telomerase and fibrin degradation product in detecting primary bladder cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Studies on the diagnosis of primary bladder cancer published from 1990 through November 2001 in English and German were retrieved from MEDLINE and EMBASE data bases. In our research we included studies that evaluated 1 or more of the markers, used cystoscopy as the reference standard and allowed the construction of a 2 x 2 contingency table for a per patient analysis. The data plus items on study and clinical characteristics were extracted by 2 observers. Sensitivity and specificity for each marker were estimated using a bivariate random effect meta-analysis. A multivariable analysis was performed to explain study variation.
RESULTS: A total of 42 studies were included in our review. Only 2 studies were available on fibrin degradation product, hence a meta-analysis was not possible. Cytology had the best specificity at 94% (95% CI: 90% to 96%). This figure was significantly better than that of the other markers except for telomerase (specificity 86% [71% to 94%]). Telomerase had the best sensitivity (75% [71% to 79%]) but it was not significantly better than that of BTA stat (70% [66% to 74%]). Case control designs yielded lower values for sensitivity for the tumor markers cytology, bladder tumor antigen and BTA stat.
CONCLUSIONS: Cytology has the best specificity and telomerase the best sensitivity. However, none of the markers studied here is sensitive enough to be recommended for daily routine.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Studies on the diagnosis of primary bladder cancer published from 1990 through November 2001 in English and German were retrieved from MEDLINE and EMBASE data bases. In our research we included studies that evaluated 1 or more of the markers, used cystoscopy as the reference standard and allowed the construction of a 2 x 2 contingency table for a per patient analysis. The data plus items on study and clinical characteristics were extracted by 2 observers. Sensitivity and specificity for each marker were estimated using a bivariate random effect meta-analysis. A multivariable analysis was performed to explain study variation.
RESULTS: A total of 42 studies were included in our review. Only 2 studies were available on fibrin degradation product, hence a meta-analysis was not possible. Cytology had the best specificity at 94% (95% CI: 90% to 96%). This figure was significantly better than that of the other markers except for telomerase (specificity 86% [71% to 94%]). Telomerase had the best sensitivity (75% [71% to 79%]) but it was not significantly better than that of BTA stat (70% [66% to 74%]). Case control designs yielded lower values for sensitivity for the tumor markers cytology, bladder tumor antigen and BTA stat.
CONCLUSIONS: Cytology has the best specificity and telomerase the best sensitivity. However, none of the markers studied here is sensitive enough to be recommended for daily routine.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app