{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024924471299093656, 'fraction_numerical': 0.030966767371601207, 'mean_word_length': 4.915178571428571, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Clinical evaluation of urinary nuclear matrix protein 22 as a marker for bladder cancer].

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical usefulness of urinary nuclear matrix protein 22 (NMP22) as a marker for bladder cancer. We examined the positive rates of NMP22 test, urinary cytology and bladder tumor antigen (BTA) test, and compared the positive rate of NMP22 test with that in urinary cytology and BTA test. Urine samples were obtained from 50 patients with histologically confirmed bladder cancer before the treatment. The samples were examined by NMP22 test, urinary cytology and BTA test. In 50 patients with bladder cancer, the overall positive rate was 40% for NMP22 test, 40% for urinary cytology, and 16% for BTA test. A combination of NMP22 test and urinary cytology showed a significantly higher positive rate (54%) as compared to NMP22 test or urinary cytology alone. When NMP22 test and urinary cytology were compared for tumor size, number, shape, stage and grade, NMP22 test showed a significant higher positive rate than urinary cytology in grade 1 bladder cancer. In conclusion, although NMP22 test and urinary cytology gave a similar positive rate, a combination of NMP22 test and urinary cytology is more useful than the NMP22 test or urinary cytology alone for monitoring of bladder cancer.