Literature DB >> 12565772

Are false-positive urine markers for the detection of bladder carcinoma really wrong or do they predict tumor recurrence?

Martin G Friedrich1, Angelika Hellstern, Marieta I Toma, Peter Hammerer, Hartwig Huland.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND
OBJECTIVES: A problem in the interpretation of noninvasive urine tests for detection of bladder carcinoma is the finding of false-positive results. Several authors have described that patients with false-positive results are at high risk for tumor recurrence or progression. Only few data are available for comparing the clinical course of patients with false-positive test results and patients with true-negative results. We studied whether patients with false-positive results of various urine test had a higher recurrence rate than patients with true-negative results.
METHODS: Urine samples from 61 patients without evidence of active bladder carcinoma were included. Of the 61 patients, 51 had a history of bladder cancer, and 10 underwent transurethral resection for suspect of bladder carcinoma but had negative pathologic findings. Immunocytology (Lewis X and 486p3/12) was performed on bladder washings, and BTAstat and NMP22 were performed on urine samples.
RESULTS: During the follow-up period, 22 patients had one or more false-positive BTAstat test results, 25 patients had one or more false-positive NMP22 tests, 42 patients had at least one false-positive Lewis X test, and 11 patients had one or more false-positive 486p3/12 test. During a follow-up period of 3-39 months (median, 17.6 months) four patients expected a tumor recurrence. Among patients with false-positive urine test results 2 of 22 (9.1%, BTAstat), 2 of 25 (8%, NMP22), 4 of 42 (9.5%, Lewis X), and 3 of 11 (27.2%, 486p3/12) suffered from tumor recurrence. In contrast, among patients with true-negative test results 2 of 39 (5.2%, BTAstat), 2 of 36 (5.6%, NMP22), 0 of 18 (0%, Lewis X), 1 of 50 (2.0%, 486p3/12) had a tumor recurrence.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a false-positive urine test result do not generally have a greater risk of tumor recurrence or progression than patients with a true-negative result. In our series, only patients with false-positive 486p3/12 test result had a higher recurrence rate. Our findings do not justify a more aggressive adjuvant treatment or surveillance for patients with false-positive urine tests.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12565772     DOI: 10.1016/s0302-2838(02)00555-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  9 in total

Review 1.  Early bladder cancer: concept, diagnosis, and management.

Authors:  Hiroshi Kitamura; Taiji Tsukamoto
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  NMP22: Does it have a predictive potential for recurrence and progression in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer?

Authors:  Wassim Kassouf
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  Rapid diagnosis and follow up of bladder cancer patients using urinary high molecular weight cytokeratins.

Authors:  Abdelfattah M Attallah; Hanem A Sakr; Hisham Ismail; Mohamed F Ismail; Ashraf S Ibrahim; Mohamed M El-Sharabasy; Ibrahim El-Dosoky
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2006-05-17       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  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

5.  Biomarkers for detection and surveillance of bladder cancer.

Authors:  Lorne I Budman; Wassim Kassouf; Jordan R Steinberg
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 1.862

6.  Comparison of the ImmunoCyt test and urinary cytology with other urine tests in the detection and surveillance of bladder cancer.

Authors:  Marieta I Toma; Martin G Friedrich; Stefan H Hautmann; K Thorsten Jäkel; Andreas Erbersdobler; Angelika Hellstern; Hartwig Huland
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2004-02-27       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 7.  Defining the role of NMP22 in bladder cancer surveillance.

Authors:  Carvell T Nguyen; J Stephen Jones
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2007-12-04       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 8.  Recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of bladder cancer.

Authors:  Grace Cheung; Arun Sahai; Michele Billia; Prokar Dasgupta; Muhammad S Khan
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2013-01-17       Impact factor: 8.775

9.  [DNA methylation on urinalysis and as a prognostic marker in urothelial cancer of the bladder].

Authors:  M G Friedrich; M I Toma; J K H F Chun; T Steuber; L Budäus; H Isbarn; H Huland
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 0.803

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.