Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
British Journal of Urology · October 11, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Objectives To review prognostic and treatment‐response biomarkers for non‐muscle‐invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), with particular attention to biological function, specimen type, assay method, statistical evidence, and possible clinical use. Methods We conducted a focused narrative search of PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for English‐language human studies published from January 2015 to August 2026, supplemented by earlier pivotal studies and reference‐list screening. Priority was given to NMIBC cohorts reporting recurrence, progression, survival, or response to intravesical therapy. We considered cohort specificity, sample size, multivariable analysis, testing in an independent population, and assay standardisation. Results Tumour‐tissue markers such as stromal antigen 2 (STAG2), fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3), fibroblast activation protein‐α, the urokinase plasminogen activator system, and cadherins are linked to chromosomal stability, growth‐factor signalling, stromal remodelling, extracellular‐matrix invasion, and epithelial–mesenchymal transition. Urinary RNAs and plasma circulating tumour DNA permit non‐invasive sampling, although results depend on specimen handling and assay conditions. Blood‐derived inflammatory indices are inexpensive but non‐specific. Most evidence comes from retrospective single‐cohort studies; reported effects and cut‐offs are not always consistent, and few markers materially improve clinicopathological models. Conclusions None of the biomarkers reviewed can currently replace guideline‐based risk stratification or cystoscopic surveillance. Future studies should define assays and thresholds prospectively, test them in independent cohorts, and show that adding a biomarker improves prediction and patient management at an acceptable cost.