ArticleBMC cancer2026
Celldetect test performance in monitoring bladder cancer recurrence after transurethral resection.
Article in BMC cancer, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) has a high recurrence rate, necessitating rigorous surveillance primarily reliant on invasive cystoscopy. While urine cytology offers high specificity, its sensitivity for low-grade tumors is unacceptably low. CellDetect is a novel histochemical staining test based on differential metabolic activity between normal and malignant cells, which is often referred to as the Warburg effect. This study aimed to evaluate its real-world diagnostic performance for detecting NMIBC recurrence.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 243 patients under surveillance after transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT). All patients underwent both the CellDetect test and cystoscopy within 24 months post-operatively. Using cystoscopy and histopathology as the reference standard, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of CellDetect were evaluated. Subgroup analyses were performed based on tumor grade, stage, and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) risk category.
resultsAmong the 52 patients (21.4%) with histologically confirmed recurrence, the overall sensitivity of the CellDetect test was 76.9%, specificity was 78.0%, PPV was 52.6%, NPV was 91.2%, and overall accuracy was 77.8%. Sensitivity was significantly higher for high-grade (HG) tumors (93.8%) than for low-grade (LG) tumors (69.4%). In the high-risk EORTC subgroup, sensitivity was 88.9% and NPV was 95.2%. Furthermore, among 18 patients with “discordant” findings (positive CellDetect/ negative cystoscopy), 6 (33.3%) were subsequently diagnosed with recurrence upon random biopsy.
conclusionIn this retrospective analysis, the CellDetect test demonstrated encouraging diagnostic performance in the post-TURBT surveillance setting, particularly its high NPV and sensitivity for HG tumors. “Discordant” results may hold predictive value for imminent recurrence. Further prospective validation is warranted. CellDetect represents a potential tool for developing a more personalized, risk-adapted, and patient-friendly follow-up strategy for NMIBC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.