Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 335

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

COMPARISON OF SCREENING METHODS IN THE DETECTION OF BLADDER CANCER

RAMAKUMAR, SANJAY, BHUIYAN, JALALUDDIN, BESSE, JENNIFER A., ROBERTS, STEVEN G., WOLLAN, PETER C., BLUTE, MICHAEL L., O'KANE, DENNIS J.·1999·Journal of Urology

Abstract

PURPOSE: We prospectively evaluate and compare the sensitivity and specificity of urine cytology, BTA stat, NMP22, fibrin/fibrinogen degradation products (FDP), telomerase, chemiluminescent hemoglobin and hemoglobin dipstick to detect bladder cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single voided specimens were obtained from 57 patients with bladder cancer, and 139 without evidence of bladder malignancy on cystoscopy or a negative biopsy of indeterminate lesions. A cytology report was available for 125 patients and interpreted independently. BTA stat, NMP22 and FDP were analyzed according to manufacturer specifications. The telomerase assay was performed on cells collected from urine by centrifugation in preparation for polymerase chain reaction based amplification using the telomeric repeat amplification protocol assay. The chemiluminescent screening assay for hemoglobin in urine uses the pseudoperoxidase activity of hemoglobin on hydrogen peroxide and subsequent oxidation of 7-dimethylaminonaphthalene-1,2-dicarbonic acid hydrazide to generate chemiluminescence emission. Hemoglobin dipstick was interpreted as positive if the hemoglobin content in the urine was trace or greater. RESULTS: Overall sensitivity with urine cytology, BTA stat, NMP22, FDP, telomerase, chemiluminescent hemoglobin and the hemoglobin dipstick was 44, 74, 53, 52, 70, 67 and 47%, respectively. Specificity with cytology, telomerase and FDP was high (95, 99 and 91%, respectively) but BTA stat, NMP22 (optimized), chemiluminescent hemoglobin (optimized) and the hemoglobin dipstick demonstrated lower specificity of 73, 60, 63 and 84%, respectively. Stepwise logistic regression analysis revealed that for all tumors, and within each tumor grade and stage telomerase had the strongest association with bladder cancer among all tests (69% overall concordance). Telomerase was also positive in 91% of the patients (10 of 11) with carcinoma in situ. CONCLUSIONS: Urinary telomerase had the highest combination of sensitivity and specificity (70 and 99%, respectively) for bladder cancer screening in these patients. It was the strongest predictor with superior accuracy in patients with grade 1 and noninvasive tumors (pTa), and extremely useful in patients with carcinoma in situ. Telomerase appears to be promising and outperformed cytology, BTA stat, NMP22, FDP, chemiluminescent hemoglobin and hemoglobin dipstick in the prediction of bladder cancer.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0022-5347(01)61899-8

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 335

Metadata

Authors
RAMAKUMAR, S., BHUIYAN, J., BESSE, J. A., ROBERTS, S. G., WOLLAN, P. C., BLUTE, M. L., & O'KANE, D. J.
Venue
Journal of Urology
Published
1999-02
Volume
161
Issue
2
Pages
388-394
ISSN
  • 0022-5347 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-3792
OpenAlex
W2167120646
Cited by
335
References
1
FWCI
36.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: COMPARISON OF SCREENING METHODS IN THE DETECTION OF BLADDER CANCER. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0022-5347(01)61899-8
The paper
RAMAKUMAR, S., BHUIYAN, J., BESSE, J. A., ROBERTS, S. G., WOLLAN, P. C., BLUTE, M. L., & O'KANE, D. J. (1999). COMPARISON OF SCREENING METHODS IN THE DETECTION OF BLADDER CANCER. Journal of Urology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(01)61899-8

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.