Diagnostic value of urinary survivin as a biomarker for bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies
- 78 Downloads
This study is a meta-analysis and aims to determine the value of urinary survivin for detecting bladder cancer (BC) on the basis of preceding statistical performance and to compare their diagnostic value.
Materials and methods
Considering that the urinary survivin data were from both RNA and protein levels, the key words “bladder cancer” AND “survivin” and “bladder cancer” AND “survivin RNA” were used; and PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched to identify relevant articles. The methodological quality of each study was assessed by QUADAS-2. Data were analyzed by STATA 12.0 and Meta-disc v.1.4 software package. A random-effects model was used and subgroup analysis was carried out to identify possible sources of heterogeneity.
Nine articles for survivin protein test with 789 patients and 684 controls, and 12 articles for survivin RNA test with 880 patients and 922 controls were identified. The results showed that the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI 0.73, 0.84), specificity was 0.87 (95% CI 0.79, 0.92) of the survivin protein test for bladder cancer, and the sensitivity and specificity was 0.84 (95% CI 0.79, 0.88) and 0.94 (95% CI 0.89, 0.97) of the survivin RNA test. The AUC of the two approaches was 0.89 (95% CI 0.86, 0.91) and 0.94 (95% CI 0.92, 0.96), respectively.
The survivin protein and survivin RNA both had great potential as biomarkers for BC detection, and survivin RNA showed higher accuracy than survivin protein on BC diagnosis.
KeywordsBladder cancer Survivin Diagnosis Meta-analysis
This study was supported by Technology Project of the Department of Health of Jilin Province (Grant No. 2016J044).
Protocol/project development XL. Data collection or management XL, ZZL, QZ. Data analysis ZZL, RX. Investigation CPW, QZ. Methodology XL. Project administration ZZL. Software FS. Supervision RX. Validation XL. Visualization ZZL, QZ. Writing—original draft ZZL, FS, QZ. Writing—review and editing XL, CPW.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
- 1.Malats N, Real FX (2015) Epidemiology of bladder cancer. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 29: 177-189, viiGoogle Scholar
- 15.Hou JQ, He J, Wen D et al (2006) Survivin mRNA expression in urine as a biomarker for patients with transitional cell carcinoma of bladder. 中华医学杂志(英文版) 119:1118Google Scholar
- 22.Abd ElHakim TF, Elshafie MK, Abdou AG, Azmy RM, Elnaidany SS et al (2014) Value of urinary survivin as a diagnostic marker in bladder cancer. Anal Quant Cytopathol Histopathol 36:121–127Google Scholar
- 24.Xuefeng Yaming, Wang Jianjun, Qingyun et al (2013) Sandwich ELISA for detecting urinary Survivin in bladder cancer. Chin J Cancer Res 25:375–381Google Scholar
- 28.Schmidt J, Propping C, Siow WY, Lohse-Fischer A, Toma M et al (2016) Diagnostic and prognostic value of bladder cancer-related transcript markers in urine. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 185:e211Google Scholar