Bladder cancer is one of the main problems of modern urology. Currently ultrasound of the bladder and cystoscopy are the primary methods for diagnosing bladder cancer. e "ideal" method for laboratory diagnosis of bladder cancer should have high sensitivity and specificity, should be easily reproducible, inexpensive, be suitable for primary diagnosis, screening and follow-up of patients, for timely detection of recurrence. Urine cytology does not possess these properties. In clinical practice, diagnostic systems have used UBC, BTA, NMP-22, CYFRA 21-1, and a number of others. Present publication deals with issues of sensitivity, specificity of the known test systems, the analysis of comparative studies. Each method has relative advantages and disadvantages. Influence on the results of the study features of the method was shown for storage and processing of the biologic material, the histological structure of the tumor, presence of chronic urothelium-associated inflammation, urolithiasis, recently produced surgery on the urinary tract. Yet there is no marker that could become an alternative to cytology, despite the fact that the isolated usage of cytological methods is non-informative. Presumably the use of a palette of markers in combination with imaging techniques will enhance the diagnostic capabilities, but it is currently not clear which elements should be present in such palette. Efforts are required from many specialists (oncologists, urologists, pathologists, genetics specialists, molecular biologists) to create the most advanced diagnostic system for the bladder cancer.