Diagnostic performance of nuclear matrix protein 22 and urine cytology for bladder cancer: A meta‐analysis

Abstract

Purpose: To compare and analyze the diagnostic efficacy of nuclear matrix protein 22 (NMP22) and urine cytology (UC) in the diagnosis of bladder cancer.Methods: Search the Chinese and English studies on NMP22 and urinary cytology in the diagnosis of bladder tumors published between 1999 and June, and conduct quality evaluation, data extraction and analysis.Results: A total of 397 related articles were retrieved, and 12 articles were finally included after screening, including 2456 subjects. The heterogeneity test shows that there is no discernible threshold effect. Perform meta-analysis according to the random effects model. The results showed that the total sensitivity of NMP22 and UC were 0.79 (95% CI [0.73, 0.84])

Diagnostic Performance of Biomarkers for Bladder Cancer Detection Suitable for Community and Primary Care Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…The complementary narrative synthesis aimed to ascertain such applicability, by investigating further the population, contextual and implementation factors. Findings indicated variation similar to that of the meta-analysis and are in line with evidence reported in previous reviews [12,79] and meta-analyses [13,80] about the potential of these biomarkers to effectively supplement cytology in bladder cancer detection or help with appropriate rapid referrals and reduce the number of unnecessary cystoscopies in the studied populations. However, certain barriers, such as diagnostic performance measures being affected by the degree of haematuria [32,65,67] or the inability of certain biomarkers to detect low grade tumors [38,58], were also identified, compromising their utility in the general population.…”

“…The calculated adjusted HSROC revealed small variations in discrimination across the three biomarkers included in the meta-analysis, all of which are well-established FDAapproved biomarkers, that have, either individually or comparatively, been explored in systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses before [13,[73][74][75][76]. Heterogeneity beyond variation in adopted thresholds was also confirmed for these three biomarkers.…”

“…These have largely been tested in patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of cancer and referred for further investigation, and who are therefore at a higher-than-average risk of having an undetected cancer. Several reviews have been conducted focusing on individual biomarkers, biomarker panels or certain biomarker categories (e.g., proteins) seeking to describe and explore their diagnostic performance and clinical utility for bladder cancer detection [10][11][12][13]. These findings demonstrate that urinary biomarkers have the potential to improve current diagnostic strategies.…”

An angiogenesis‑related lncRNA signature for the prognostic prediction of patients with bladder cancer and LINC02321 promotes bladder cancer progression via the VEGFA signaling pathway

“…in clinical practice, tumour biomarkers are used to identify primary tumours and to screen high-risk populations, and they are key for the prognosis and prediction of the efficacy of treatments. over the past decade, numerous bladder cancer-associated tumour markers, such as bladder tumour antigen series (19), nuclear matrix protein 22 (20) and fibrin degradation products (21), have been reported in clinical practice. These tumour markers facilitate the detection of occult bladder cancer in the clinic.…”

Diagnostic Performances of Urine Cytology and TERT Promoter Mutations in Bladder Cancer

“…After cell death, NMP-22 is released and is available in human urine in the form of soluble complexes or fragments. Urinary NMP-22 is directly released by tumor cells, so the test results are more reliable [15]. In recent years, there have been a lot of clinical studies on NMP-22 in non-invasive bladder tumor screening and monitoring.…”