Biomarqueurs urinaires pour le diagnostic et la surveillance du cancer de la vessie : une étude multicentrique pour évaluer l’exactitude d’un outil de diagnostic complet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bladder cancer (BC) is the fifth most incident cancer in Canada and represents a major socio-economic burden, largely due to its high recurrence rate and heterogeneity. This problematic requires close monitoring of disease progression, which currently relies primarily on cystoscopy which is an invasive procedure. This repetitive need for cystoscopy also increases costs related to BC management. To address this issue, the analysis of the urinary proteome and genome offers promising potential as a reliable, non-invasive, and cost-effective alternative for disease detection. By comparing urinary components (proteins, circulating tumor DNA, exfoliated cells, debris, etc.) between patients with bladder cancer and healthy individuals, it is possible to identify urinary biomarkers that are specific to the disease. The international multicenter UbioBCa study (Canada, France, Germany) aims to evaluate the effectiveness of three tests based on urinary biomarker detection, to assess their ability to diagnose and/or monitor the progression of bladder cancer over time. The three tests are: 1) the B3J test, based on four urinary protein biomarkers detected by mass spectrometry (PRM), 2) the uTERTpm test, based on the detection of five mutations in the telomerase promoter by ddPCR, and 3) two commercially available rapid tests that detect urinary protein biomarkers using ELISA. The advancement of the study at the Sherbrooke site led to the recruitment of a cohort of 325 participants, including 206 controls and 119 patients with bladder cancer, and enabled the assessment of the diagnostic performance of the three different tests within this cohort. A subset of 31 patients is currently followed up to evaluate the biomarkers’ ability to predict recurrence. Among the tests, the performance of the uTERTpm test was superior, with a sensitivity (SV) and specificity (SP) of 88% and 87% respectively, outperforming both the B3J test and the two rapid tests. In comparison, B3J, BTA stat, and UBC Rapid showed SV/SP values of 79%/56%, 82%/47% and 53%/52% respectively.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.031 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".