Effectiveness of urine fibronectin as a non-invasive diagnostic biomarker in bladder cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background: Previous researches pointed out that the measurement of urine fibronectin (Fn) could be a potential diagnostic test for bladder cancer (BCa). We conducted this meta-analysis to fully assess the diagnostic value of urine Fn for BCa detection. Methods: A systematic literature search in PubMed, ISI Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and CBM was carried out to identify eligible studies evaluating the urine Fn in diagnosing BCa. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were established. We applied the STATA 13.0, Meta-Disc 1.4, and RevMan 5.3 software to the meta-analysis. Results: Eight separate studies with 744 bladder cancer patients were enrolled in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and DOR were 0.80 (95%CI = 0.77-0.83), 0.79 (95%CI = 0.73-0.84), and 15.18 (95%CI = 10.07-22.87), respectively, and the area under the curve (AUC) of SROC was 0.83 (95%CI = 0.79-0.86). The diagnostic power of a combined method (urine Fn combined with urine cytology) was also evaluated, and its sensitivity and AUC were significantly higher (0.86 (95%CI = 0.82-0.90) and 0.89 (95%CI = 0.86-0.92), respectively). Meta-regression along with subgroup analysis based on various covariates revealed the potential sources of the heterogeneity and the detailed diagnostic value of each subgroup. Sensitivity analysis supported that the result was robust. No threshold effect and publication bias were found in this meta-analysis. Conclusions: Urine Fn may become a promising non-invasive biomarker for bladder cancer with a relatively satisfactory diagnostic power. And the combination of urine Fn with cytology could be an alternative option for detecting BCa in clinical practice. The potential value of urine Fn still needs to be validated in large, multi-center, and prospective studies.