Literature DB >> 16287445

Fluorescence in situ hybridization for detecting transitional cell carcinoma: implications for clinical practice.

Jennifer Laudadio1, Thomas E Keane, Hugh M Reeves, Stephen J Savage, Rana S Hoda, Janice M Lage, Daynna J Wolff.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic sensitivity of genetic studies using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for detecting both new and recurrent cases of transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) in a routine clinical practice setting, as bladder cancer has a significant risk of recurrence and progression to invasive disease and thus sensitive surveillance testing is very important. PATIENTS AND METHODS: FISH was performed using the UroVysion kit (Vysis Inc., Downers Grove, IL, USA) Consecutive patients were assessed using FISH, both to evaluate those with a history of TCC or with suspicious symptoms, and the FISH results were compared with concurrent biopsy and cytological assessments.
RESULTS: In all, 521 consecutive FISH tests from 300 patients were evaluated; 47% had a history of bladder cancer and 53% had suspicious symptoms. Of the 521 FISH tests, 24% were positive; concurrent cytology was available for 84% of the FISH tests, with a concordance rate of 78% (6% were positive for both and 72% were negative by both tests). For the discordant cases, FISH was positive and cytology negative in 21% of cases, and cytology was positive with a negative FISH for 1%. In all, 99 FISH tests had concurrent biopsy data. Of the 44 cases histologically positive for TCC, 32 were FISH-positive, resulting in an overall sensitivity (95% confidence interval) of 73 (60-88)%. FISH detected 95% of cases with high-grade carcinoma, while only seven of these 17 were positive by concurrent cytological assessment. FISH detected 56% and cytology detected 32% of low-grade lesions. FISH detected all nine new cases with positive histology. Overall, the specificity of FISH was 65 (53-78)%. Of 112 patients with previous TCC, 28 had a recurrence; 22 of these had positive FISH results.
CONCLUSION: FISH analysis has a high sensitivity for detecting new cases of TCC, as well as recurrences. From the present data FISH is considerably more sensitive and only slightly less specific than cytology in diagnosing TCC. Therefore, we recommend FISH as a useful initial diagnostic tool in patients suspected of both new and recurrent TCC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16287445     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05826.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  17 in total

1.  Evaluation of urovysion and cytology for bladder cancer detection: a study of 1835 paired urine samples with clinical and histologic correlation.

Authors:  Haythem Dimashkieh; Daynna J Wolff; T Michael Smith; Patricia M Houser; Paul J Nietert; Jack Yang
Journal:  Cancer Cytopathol       Date:  2013-06-25       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  Urine cytology and adjunct markers for detection and surveillance of bladder cancer.

Authors:  Peggy S Sullivan; Jessica B Chan; Mary R Levin; Jianyu Rao
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2010-07-25       Impact factor: 4.060

3.  Clinical evaluation of two consecutive UroVysion fluorescence in situ hybridization tests to detect intravesical recurrence of bladder cancer: a prospective blinded comparative study in Japan.

Authors:  Takahiro Kojima; Hiroyuki Nishiyama; Seiichiro Ozono; Shiro Hinotsu; Naoto Keino; Akito Yamaguchi; Hideki Sakai; Yutaka Enomoto; Shigeo Horie; Kiyohide Fujimoto; Hideyasu Matsuyama; Takehiko Okamura; Yusuke Kanimoto; Mototsugu Oya; Norio Nonomura; Seiji Naito; Hideyuki Akaza
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-07-03       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 4.  Molecular and Functional Diagnostic Tools in Precision Oncology for Urological Malignancies.

Authors:  Vasanthakumar Sekar; Debapriya Ghosh Mehrotra; Biswanath Majumder
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-12-15

5.  Fluorescence in situ hybridization for detecting urothelial carcinoma: a clinicopathologic study.

Authors:  Nancy P Caraway; Abha Khanna; Ricardo L Fernandez; Linda Payne; Roland L Bassett; Hua-Zhong Zhang; Ashish Kamat; Ruth L Katz
Journal:  Cancer Cytopathol       Date:  2010-10-25       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Recommendations for the improvement of bladder cancer quality of care in Canada: A consensus document reviewed and endorsed by Bladder Cancer Canada (BCC), Canadian Urologic Oncology Group (CUOG), and Canadian Urological Association (CUA), December 2015.

Authors:  Wassim Kassouf; Armen Aprikian; Peter Black; Girish Kulkarni; Jonathan Izawa; Libni Eapen; Adrian Fairey; Alan So; Scott North; Ricardo Rendon; Srikala S Sridhar; Tarik Alam; Fadi Brimo; Normand Blais; Chris Booth; Joseph Chin; Peter Chung; Darrel Drachenberg; Yves Fradet; Michael Jewett; Ron Moore; Chris Morash; Bobby Shayegan; Geoffrey Gotto; Neil Fleshner; Fred Saad; D Robert Siemens
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2016-02-08       Impact factor: 1.862

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.  [Secondary prevention after urological tumor diseases. Focusing on the kidneys, testes, and bladder].

Authors:  M J Mathers; D A Lazica; T Klotz; F Sommer; S Roth
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 0.639

9.  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

Review 10.  Clinical states model for biomarkers in bladder cancer.

Authors:  Andrea B Apolo; Matthew Milowsky; Dean F Bajorin
Journal:  Future Oncol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.404

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.