Literature DB >> 18336612

Early results of bladder-cancer screening in a high-risk population of heavy smokers.

Hannes Steiner1, Maria Bergmeister, Irmgard Verdorfer, Thomas Granig, Gregor Mikuz, Georg Bartsch, Brigitte Stoehr, Andrea Brunner.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To report first results of an early bladder-cancer detection programme, and to evaluate the detection rate and the diagnostic value of the tests used. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Urine samples of 183 screened subjects with a history of smoking of > or =40 pack-years were collected for analysis with a urinary dipstick test for haematuria, the nuclear matrix protein-22 test (BladderChek, Matritech, Inc., Newton, MA, USA), voided urine cytology and a molecular cytology test (UroVysion, Abbott Molecular Inc., Des Plaines, IL, USA). Participants with at least one positive test result had a further evaluation including cystoscopy and radiological imaging. The subjects' risk factors, test results and histological findings were analysed.
RESULTS: In all, 75 subjects had at least one positive test result and were evaluated further; abnormal histological findings were detected in 18 (24% of those who had cystoscopy, 9.8% of the original 183), 15 of those in the urinary bladder, with pTaG1 (one), carcinoma in situ (two), dysplastic lesions (11) and one an inverted papilloma. In the upper urinary tract, two urothelial tumours (pTaG1 and pTxN2G3) and one renal cell carcinoma (pT1G2) were detected by computed tomography. In summary, six of 183 subjects (3.3%) had a histologically confirmed malignant tumour and another 12 (6.6%) were identified with a possible pre-cancerous lesion of the urinary tract. The urinary dipstick, BladderChek, cytology and UroVysion detected (i.e. were true-positive in) nine (50%), one (6%), seven (39%) and 11 (61%) of the 18 tumours found, while they failed to detect nine (50%), 17 (94%), 11 (61%) and seven (39%) of these lesions, respectively. Omitting the urine dipstick test, the BladderChek, cytology or UroVysion from the test setting could have spared 40, five, two or one subjects(s) from unnecessary invasive interventions; however, three, none, two or six lesions, would have been missed. More positive screening tests per subject was associated with a higher probability of a (pre)-malignant lesion.
CONCLUSION: Screening a high-risk group with a history of smoking of > or =40 pack-years showed a significant proportion (3.3%) with malignancy. These first results are encouraging and warrant continuation of the screening programme. In this series the most efficient screening tool was the combination of UroVysion, cytology and urinary dipstick testing. Of special scientific interest will be the follow-up of those patients with a possible pre-cancerous lesion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18336612     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.07596.x

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


  15 in total

1.  [Molecular markers in the diagnostics and therapy of urothelial cancer].

Authors:  C Protzel; O W Hakenberg
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  The prevalence of microscopic hematuria in a cohort of women with pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Nirmala Pillalamarri; Dara Shalom; Sharlene Sanidad; Meredith Akerman; Lawrence Lind; Harvey Winkler
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2014-07-01       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Variation in the intensity of hematuria evaluation: a target for primary care quality improvement.

Authors:  David F Friedlander; Matthew J Resnick; Chaochen You; Jeffrey Bassett; Vidhush Yarlagadda; David F Penson; Daniel A Barocas
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 4.965

Review 4.  [Microscopic hematuria : Reasonable and risk-adapted diagnostic evaluation].

Authors:  N Löbig; F Wezel; T Martini; B Schröppel; C Bolenz
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 0.639

5.  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 6.  Molecular screening for bladder cancer: progress and potential.

Authors:  Anirban P Mitra; Richard J Cote
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 14.432

7.  Does quantification of smoking history correlate with initial bladder tumor grade and stage?

Authors:  Eugene J Pietzak; S Bruce Malkowicz
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 3.092

8.  Bladder cancer screening in aluminum smelter workers.

Authors:  Oyebode A Taiwo; Martin D Slade; Linda F Cantley; Baylah Tessier-Sherman; Deron Galusha; Sharon R Kirsche; A Michael Donoghue; Mark R Cullen
Journal:  J Occup Environ Med       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 2.162

9.  Comparison of frequency of asymptomatic microhematuria in patients with stage 2-4 versus stage 0-1 pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Emrah Töz; Sefa Kurt; Mehmet Tunç Canda; Çağdaş Şahin; Ibrahim Uyar
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 1.088

10.  A segregation index combining phenotypic (clinical characteristics) and genotypic (gene expression) biomarkers from a urine sample to triage out patients presenting with hematuria who have a low probability of urothelial carcinoma.

Authors:  Laimonis Kavalieris; Paul J O'Sullivan; James M Suttie; Brent K Pownall; Peter J Gilling; Christophe Chemasle; David G Darling
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 2.264

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.