Literature DB >> 19454613

Detection of urothelial bladder cancer cells in voided urine can be improved by a combination of cytology and standardized microsatellite analysis.

Peter J Wild1, Thomas Fuchs, Robert Stoehr, Dieter Zimmermann, Simona Frigerio, Barbara Padberg, Inbal Steiner, Ellen C Zwarthoff, Maximilian Burger, Stefan Denzinger, Ferdinand Hofstaedter, Glen Kristiansen, Thomas Hermanns, Hans-Helge Seifert, Maurizio Provenzano, Tullio Sulser, Volker Roth, Joachim M Buhmann, Holger Moch, Arndt Hartmann.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate molecular and immunohistochemical markers to develop a molecular grading of urothelial bladder cancer and to test these markers in voided urine samples. EXPERIMENTAL
DESIGN: 255 consecutive biopsies from primary bladder cancer patients were evaluated on a tissue microarray. The clinical parameters gender, age, adjacent carcinoma in situ, and multifocality were collected. UroVysion fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was done. Expression of cytokeratin 20, MIB1, and TP53 was analyzed by immunohistochemistry. Fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) status was studied by SNaPshot mutation detection. Results were correlated with clinical outcome by Cox regression analysis. To assess the predictive power of different predictor subsets to detect high grade and tumor invasion, logistic regression models were learned. Additionally, voided urine samples of 119 patients were investigated. After cytologic examination, urine samples were matched with their biopsies and analyzed for loss of heterozygosity (LOH), FGFR3 mutation, polysomy, and p16 deletion using UroVysion FISH. Receiver operator characteristic curves for various predictor subsets were plotted.
RESULTS: In biopsies, high grade and solid growth pattern were independent prognostic factors for overall survival. A model consisting of UroVysion FISH and FGFR3 status (FISH + FGFR3) predicted high grade significantly better compared with a recently proposed molecular grade (MIB1 + FGFR3). In voided urine, the combination of cytology with LOH analysis (CYTO + LOH) reached the highest diagnostic accuracy for the detection of bladder cancer cells and performed better than cytology alone (sensitivity of 88.2% and specificity of 97.1%).
CONCLUSIONS: The combination of cytology with LOH analysis could reduce unpleasant cystoscopies for bladder cancer patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19454613     DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0099

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  14 in total

Review 1.  [Urine cytology - update 2013. A systematic review of recent literature].

Authors:  M Böhm; F vom Dorp; M Schostak; O W Hakenberg
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  Accuracy of grading of urothelial carcinoma on urine cytology: an analysis of interobserver and intraobserver agreement.

Authors:  Michelle D Reid; Adeboye O Osunkoya; Momin T Siddiqui; Stephen W Looney
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2012-10-20

3.  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

Review 4.  Molecular biology of bladder cancer: new insights into pathogenesis and clinical diversity.

Authors:  Margaret A Knowles; Carolyn D Hurst
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 60.716

5.  A noninvasive multianalyte urine-based diagnostic assay for urothelial cancer of the bladder in the evaluation of hematuria.

Authors:  R Jeffrey Karnes; Cecilia A Fernandez; Anthony P Shuber
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2012-08-09       Impact factor: 7.616

Review 6.  Comparison of the clinical usefulness of different urinary tests for the initial detection of bladder cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Alessandro Sciarra; Giovanni Di Lascio; Francesco Del Giudice; Pier Paolo Leoncini; Stefano Salciccia; Alessandro Gentilucci; Angelo Porreca; Benjamin I Chung; Giovanni Di Pierro; Gian Maria Busetto; Ettore De Berardinis; Martina Maggi
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2021-03-29

7.  Implication of vascular endothelial growth factor A and C in revealing diagnostic lymphangiogenic markers in node-positive bladder cancer.

Authors:  Cédric Poyet; Linto Thomas; Tobias M Benoit; David Aquino Delmo; Laura Luberto; Irina Banzola; Michèle S Günthart; Giovanni Sais; Daniel Eberli; Tullio Sulser; Maurizio Provenzano
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-03-28

8.  MiR-21-5p in urinary extracellular vesicles is a novel biomarker of urothelial carcinoma.

Authors:  Kyosuke Matsuzaki; Kazutoshi Fujita; Kentaro Jingushi; Atsunari Kawashima; Takeshi Ujike; Akira Nagahara; Yuko Ueda; Go Tanigawa; Iwao Yoshioka; Koji Ueda; Rikinari Hanayama; Motohide Uemura; Yasushi Miyagawa; Kazutake Tsujikawa; Norio Nonomura
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-04-11

Review 9.  Trends in urine biomarker discovery for urothelial bladder cancer: DNA, RNA, or protein?

Authors:  Nada Humayun-Zakaria; Douglas G Ward; Roland Arnold; Richard T Bryan
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-06

10.  Selection of microsatellite markers for bladder cancer diagnosis without the need for corresponding blood.

Authors:  Angela A G van Tilborg; Lucie C Kompier; Irene Lurkin; Ricardo Poort; Samira El Bouazzaoui; Kirstin van der Keur; Tahlita Zuiverloon; Lars Dyrskjot; Torben F Orntoft; Monique J Roobol; Ellen C Zwarthoff
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-08-22       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.