Fig 1: Independent urine verification of the urinary protein signature using dot blot analysis.a Scatter plot for CORO1C, ARPC5, RAD23B, GSPT2, and NDN in 255 healthy controls (HCs) and 179 CRC patients, including CRC without metastases (NM; n = 46), CRC with lymph node metastasis (LNM; n = 75) and CRC with distant metastasis (DM; n = 58). The median values in each group are shown as black dotted lines. The differences between groups for each marker were analyzed by two-sided Kruskal–Wallis test followed by a Dunn’s multiple comparisons test. Uncropped original blots in Source Data. b ROC curve of the diagnostic panel for the diagnostic model (NM + LNM vs. HC) in the training set and discrimination of the NM group CRC from HC. c ROC curve of serum CEA, metastatic panel, and the combination of the metastatic panel and CEA for the metastatic model (LNM + DM vs. NM). d Diagnostic and metastatic predictive power of the diagnostic signature and metastatic signature in the individuals who were misdiagnosed by the FIT test or serum CEA. The values in parentheses indicate the number of samples corresponding to each percent. +, positive; -, negative; n, number of samples. e Heatmap of the dot plot data for single urinary markers as well as the diagnostic or metastatic panel with a specificity of 95%, and the combination of corresponding clinical biomarker indices for the diagnostic or metastatic model was considered positive when either the panel or FIT/CEA was positive. Red: positive using the cutoff value with a specificity of 95%. The FIT test, serum CEA, tumor location, sex, and age are indicated by color-coding. CRC colorectal cancer, FIT fecal immunochemical test, CEA carcinoembryonic antigen, Neg. negative; Pos. positive; NA not available. The source data are provided in Source Data.