Literature DB >> 11743280

Four bladder tumor markers have a disappointingly low sensitivity for small size and low grade recurrence.

Hans Boman1, Hans Hedelin, Sten Holmäng.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We determine the sensitivity and specificity of 3 bladder tumor markers in urine, including NMP22 assay (Matritech, Newton, Massachusetts), BTA stat test (Bion Diagnostic Sciences, Inc., Redmond, Washington) and UBC antigen (IDL Biotech, Sollentuna, Sweden), and bladder wash cytology for new and recurrent bladder cancer. We examine whether tumor size, grade, and stage influence sensitivity and specificity of the markers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 304 samples in 250 patients were studied. There were 174 patients who had a history of bladder cancer, including 93 with and 81 without recurrent tumor at cystoscopy. The other group of patients consisted of 66 with newly diagnosed bladder tumor and 64 investigated for microscopic hematuria that was found to be idiopathic. BTA stat was assayed according to manufacturer instructions. NMP22 and UBC were measured in urine with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. A cutoff level of 4 for NMP22 and 1 for UBC was chosen to get the same specificity for new tumors as BTA stat (75%)
RESULTS: There was a highly significant difference (p <0.001) in all markers between patients with new bladder tumors and those without. The difference was less pronounced for tumor recurrence for NMP22, UBC and BTA stat (p=0.002, 0.016 and 0.244, respectively). The difference between new and recurrent tumors disappeared when corrected for tumor size, grade and stage. The sensitivity for new tumors was 65%, 75% and 60% for NMP22, BTA stat and UBC, respectively. Cytology had a sensitivity of 41% for new tumors at a specificity of 94%. The specificity for recurrence was 64% for NMP22, 54% BTA stat and 72% UBC. The sensitivity was 45% for NMP22, 55% BTA stat and 40% UBC.
CONCLUSIONS: Tumor size, grade and stage have a strong impact on sensitivity, and specificity for all 3 tested tumor markers as well as bladder wash cytology. The tumor markers or any combination of them cannot replace followup cystoscopy, mainly because most recurrences are small. The role of the markers for screening high risk populations and as a complement to followup cystoscopy remains to be evaluated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11743280

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


  23 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  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

3.  Deep Sequencing of Urinary RNAs for Bladder Cancer Molecular Diagnostics.

Authors:  Mandy L Y Sin; Kathleen E Mach; Rahul Sinha; Fan Wu; Dharati R Trivedi; Emanuela Altobelli; Kristin C Jensen; Debashis Sahoo; Ying Lu; Joseph C Liao
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2017-02-13       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 4.  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

5.  Comparison of the nuclear matrix protein 22 with voided urine cytology in the diagnosis of transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder.

Authors:  Murat Lekili; Ercüment Sener; Mehmet Akif Demir; Gökhan Temeltaş; Talha Müezzinoğlu; Coşkun Büyüksu
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2003-12-19

6.  Evaluation of cellular fibronectin plasma levels as a useful staging tool in different stages of transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder and renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  A Hegele; R Hofmann; B Kosche; J Kropf
Journal:  Biomark Insights       Date:  2007-02-07

Review 7.  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

8.  The value of the NMP22 test for superficial bladder cancer diagnosis and follow-up.

Authors:  Caner Doğan; Eyyüp Sabri Pelit; Asıf Yıldırım; Itır Ebru Zemheri; Cengiz Çanakcı; Erem Kaan Başok; Turhan Çaşkurlu
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2013-09

Review 9.  [Urinary cytology in cases of bladder cancer: a critical evaluation].

Authors:  P Rathert
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2003-03-26       Impact factor: 0.639

10.  The utility of fluorescence in situ hybridization for detection of bladder urothelial carcinoma in routine clinical practice.

Authors:  Kyung Won Kwak; Sun Hee Kim; Hyun Moo Lee
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2009-11-09       Impact factor: 2.153

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.