Literature DB >> 10379739

Exclusion criteria enhance the specificity and positive predictive value of NMP22 and BTA stat.

S Sharma1, C D Zippe, L Pandrangi, D Nelson, A Agarwal.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The limitation of current urinary tumor markers is the low specificity and positive predictive value, which clinically manifests as a high false-positive rate. We analyzed the false-positive data of 2 urinary tumor markers, NMP22 and the BTA stat tests. We examined the clinical categories of the false-positive results, established relative exclusion criteria, and recalculated the specificity and positive predictive value after using the exclusion criteria.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 278 symptomatic patients who presented to a urology clinic were asked to submit a single voided urine sample. Each sample was divided into 3 aliquots of which 1 was stabilized with the NMP22 test kit stabilizer and assayed for NMP22, 1 was tested for BTA stat and 1 was sent for cytological examination. All patients subsequently underwent office cystoscopy and bladder biopsy if indicated.
RESULTS: Of the 278 symptomatic patients 112 presented with microscopic hematuria, 77 gross hematuria and 89 chronic symptoms of urinary frequency or dysuria. Of 34 cases (12%) of histologically confirmed bladder cancer NMP22 detected 28 (82.4%), BTA stat 23 (67.7%) and cytology only 10 (29.4%). When atypical cytologies were considered positive, cytology then detected 19 cases (55.9%). Elevated NMP22 values were positive in 28 cases and false-positive in 44 for a specificity of 82% and a positive predictive value of 38.9%. Similarly, BTA stat test was positive in 23 cases and false-positive in 43 for a specificity of 82.4% and a positive predictive value of 34.9%. When atypical cytologies were considered positive, the specificity and positive predictive value were 93% and 55.9%. Greater than 80% of the false-positive results were clinically categorized as benign inflammatory or infectious conditions, renal or bladder calculi, recent history of a foreign body in the urinary tract, bowel interposition segment, another genitourinary cancer or an instrumented urinary sample. A category of "no known pathology" was included in analysis as a control. History of ureteral stents or any bowel interposition segment had a 100% false-positive rate. Exclusion of all 6 clinical categories improved the specificity and positive predictive value of NMP22 (95.6%, 87.5%) and BTA stat (91.5%, 69.7%), and was similar to urinary cytology.
CONCLUSIONS: Awareness and exclusion of the categories of false-positive results can increase the specificity and enhance the clinical usefulness of NMP22 and BTA stat tests. Similarly, treating an atypical cytology as positive can enhance the sensitivity and usefulness of urinary cytology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10379739     DOI: 10.1097/00005392-199907000-00014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  37 in total

1.  Modern Tumor Marker Discovery in Urology: Surface Enhanced Laser Desorption and Ionization (SELDI).

Authors:  Matthew B Gretzer; Alan W Partin; Daniel W Chan; Robert W Veltri
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2003

Review 2.  Considerations on the use of diagnostic markers in management of patients with bladder cancer.

Authors:  Piyush K Agarwal; Peter C Black; Ashish M Kamat
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2007-12-19       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  The role of BTA stat Test in follow-up of patients with bladder cancer: results from FinnBladder studies.

Authors:  Mika-P Raitanen
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2008-01-08       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Screening for bladder cancer with urinary tumor markers in chemical workers with exposure to aromatic amines.

Authors:  Beate Pesch; Dirk Taeger; Georg Johnen; Katarzyna Gawrych; Nadine Bonberg; Christian Schwentner; Harald Wellhäusser; Matthias Kluckert; Gabriele Leng; Michael Nasterlack; Yair Lotan; Arnulf Stenzl; Thomas Brüning
Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health       Date:  2013-10-16       Impact factor: 3.015

Review 5.  Current Use and Promise of Urinary Markers for Urothelial Cancer.

Authors:  William Tabayoyong; Ashish M Kamat
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2018-10-17       Impact factor: 3.092

6.  Influence of age on false positive rates of urine-based tumor markers.

Authors:  M Horstmann; T Todenhöfer; J Hennenlotter; S Aufderklamm; J Mischinger; U Kuehs; G Gakis; A Stenzl; C Schwentner
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-07-18       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 7.  The emerging role of extracellular vesicles as biomarkers for urogenital cancers.

Authors:  Muhammad Nawaz; Giovanni Camussi; Hadi Valadi; Irina Nazarenko; Karin Ekström; Xiaoqin Wang; Simona Principe; Neelam Shah; Naeem M Ashraf; Farah Fatima; Luciano Neder; Thomas Kislinger
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2014-11-18       Impact factor: 14.432

8.  Critical evaluation of urinary markers for bladder cancer detection and monitoring.

Authors:  Shahrokh F Shariat; Jose A Karam; Yair Lotan; Pierre I Karakiewizc
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2008

9.  Usefulness of the NMP22BladderChek Test for Screening and Follow-up of Bladder Cancer.

Authors:  Hwa Sub Choi; Sang Ik Lee; Dong Jun Kim; Tae Yoong Jeong
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2010-02-18

Review 10.  Bladder tumor markers: from hematuria to molecular diagnostics--where do we stand?

Authors:  Samir P Shirodkar; Vinata B Lokeshwar
Journal:  Expert Rev Anticancer Ther       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 4.512

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.