» Articles » PMID: 30127987

Diagnostic Accuracy of the UBC Rapid Test for Bladder Cancer: A Meta-analysis

Overview
Journal Oncol Lett
Specialty Oncology
Date 2018 Aug 22
PMID 30127987
Citations 8
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Bladder cancer is one of the most common cancer types globally. The UBC Rapid Test is a potential novel diagnostic method for bladder cancer, but studies into its accuracy have produced inconsistent results. Thus, the present meta-analysis was conducted in order to determine the overall accuracy of the UBC Rapid Test in detecting bladder cancer. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Chinese WanFang and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases for relevant studies. Quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies 2 was used to assess the quality of each included study. The diagnostic accuracy of the UBC Rapid Test was evaluated by pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and the area under the curve (AUC). In addition, Deeks' funnel plot was used to evaluate potential publication bias. Eight studies were included in the quantitative meta-analysis. The results were as follows: Sensitivity 0.59 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.55-0.62], specificity 0.76 (95% CI, 0.72-0.80), PLR 2.55 (95% CI, 1.75-3.70), NLR 0.56 (95% CI, 0.46-0.67), DOR 4.88 (95% CI, 2.82-8.45) and AUC 0.70 (95% CI, 0.67-0.74). According to the present results, the UBC rapid test is highly accurate in the diagnosis of bladder cancer, however, further studies with better-designed and larger samples are required in order to support the results of the present study.

Citing Articles

Diagnostic accuracy of urinary cytokeratin fragment-19 (CYFRA21-1) for bladder cancer.

Setianingsih Y, Djatisoesanto W, Laksita T, Aryati A Narra J. 2025; 4(3):e1142.

PMID: 39816087 PMC: 11731656. DOI: 10.52225/narra.v4i3.1142.


Bladder cancer biomarkers: current approaches and future directions.

Ahangar M, Mahjoubi F, Mowla S Front Oncol. 2024; 14:1453278.

PMID: 39678505 PMC: 11638051. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1453278.


New Perspectives on the Role of Liquid Biopsy in Bladder Cancer: Applicability to Precision Medicine.

Alberca-Del Arco F, Prieto-Cuadra D, Santos-Perez de la Blanca R, Saez-Barranquero F, Matas-Rico E, Herrera-Imbroda B Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(4).

PMID: 38398192 PMC: 10886494. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16040803.


Urine biomarkers in bladder cancer - current status and future perspectives.

Maas M, Todenhofer T, Black P Nat Rev Urol. 2023; 20(10):597-614.

PMID: 37225864 DOI: 10.1038/s41585-023-00773-8.


Advances in Diagnosis and Therapy for Bladder Cancer.

Hu X, Li G, Wu S Cancers (Basel). 2022; 14(13).

PMID: 35804953 PMC: 9265007. DOI: 10.3390/cancers14133181.


References
1.
Ecke T, Weiss S, Stephan C, Hallmann S, Barski D, Otto T . UBC Rapid Test for detection of carcinoma in situ for bladder cancer. Tumour Biol. 2017; 39(5):1010428317701624. DOI: 10.1177/1010428317701624. View

2.
Sedighi I . Interpretation of Diagnostic Tests: Likelihood Ratio vs. Predictive Value. Iran J Pediatr. 2014; 23(6):717. PMC: 4025141. View

3.
Antoni S, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Znaor A, Jemal A, Bray F . Bladder Cancer Incidence and Mortality: A Global Overview and Recent Trends. Eur Urol. 2016; 71(1):96-108. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.010. View

4.
Rosenblat M, Perrotta A, Vicenzino B . Polarized vs. Threshold Training Intensity Distribution on Endurance Sport Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Strength Cond Res. 2018; 33(12):3491-3500. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002618. View

5.
Agarwal N, Pal S, Hahn A, Nussenzveig R, Pond G, Gupta S . Characterization of metastatic urothelial carcinoma via comprehensive genomic profiling of circulating tumor DNA. Cancer. 2018; 124(10):2115-2124. PMC: 6857169. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31314. View