Literature DB >> 19913254

Cystoscopy revisited as the gold standard for detecting bladder cancer recurrence: diagnostic review bias in the randomized, prospective CEFUB trial.

Madelon N M van der Aa1, Ewout W Steyerberg, Chris Bangma, Bas W G van Rhijn, Ellen C Zwarthoff, Theo H van der Kwast.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We evaluated the influence of knowledge of urine test outcome on the accuracy of cystoscopy (diagnostic review bias) during surveillance in patients with low grade, nonmuscle invasive urothelial carcinoma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a prospective, single-blind, randomized, multicenter clinical trial of surveillance by microsatellite analysis urine test in 448 patients with nonmuscle invasive (pTa, pT1, G1, G2) urothelial carcinoma. Positive or negative urine test results were only communicated to the urologist in the intervention arm of 226 patients, in which cystoscopy was done if the test was positive, and at 3, 12 and 24 months. Urine test results were not communicated in the control arm of 222 patients who underwent standard 3-month cystoscopy. The primary outcome measure was the number of histologically proven bladder cancer recurrences.
RESULTS: At a median 34-month followup 218 recurrences were detected in the intervention arm compared to 163 in the control arm (p <0.001). Of 131 cystoscopies done with knowledge of a positive urine test 42 recurrences were detected. Only 6 recurrences were found in the 120 cystoscopies done without information on the positive test result (chi-square p <0.001). There was no difference in recurrence detection when urine test results were negative in the intervention and control arms (18 of 260 patients or 7% and 18 of 326 or 6%, respectively, p = 0.45).
CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic review bias should be considered in the evaluation of point of care urine tests for bladder cancer monitoring. Awareness of a positive urine test result significantly improves the urothelial carcinoma detection rate using cystoscopy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 19913254     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.08.150

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


  17 in total

1.  Three-dimensional, distendable bladder phantom for optical coherence tomography and white light cystoscopy.

Authors:  Kristen L Lurie; Gennifer T Smith; Saara A Khan; Joseph C Liao; Audrey K Ellerbee
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 3.170

2.  Serum Metabolic Profiling Identified a Distinct Metabolic Signature in Bladder Cancer Smokers: A Key Metabolic Enzyme Associated with Patient Survival.

Authors:  Chandra Sekhar Amara; Chandrashekar R Ambati; Venkatrao Vantaku; Danthasinghe Waduge Badrajee Piyarathna; Sri Ramya Donepudi; Shiva Shankar Ravi; James M Arnold; Vasanta Putluri; Gurkamal Chatta; Khurshid A Guru; Hoda Badr; Martha K Terris; Roni J Bollag; Arun Sreekumar; Andrea B Apolo; Nagireddy Putluri
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2019-01-14       Impact factor: 4.254

3.  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

4.  Comparing CxBladder to Urine Cytology as Adjunct to Cystoscopy in Surveillance of Non-muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer-A Pilot Study.

Authors:  C A Chai; W S Yeoh; R Rajandram; K P Aung; T A Ong; S Kuppusamy; A Nazran; K Kumaran; A H A Razack; J Y Teoh
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2021-05-13

Review 5.  Review of the Clinical Approaches to the Use of Urine-based Tumor Markers in Bladder Cancer.

Authors:  Timothy Clinton; Yair Lotan
Journal:  Rambam Maimonides Med J       Date:  2017-10-16

6.  Current status of genetic urinary biomarkers for surveillance of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  F Lozano; C X Raventos; A Carrion; E Trilla; J Morote
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2020-07-14       Impact factor: 2.264

7.  Collectives of diagnostic biomarkers identify high-risk subpopulations of hematuria patients: exploiting heterogeneity in large-scale biomarker data.

Authors:  Frank Emmert-Streib; Funso Abogunrin; Ricardo de Matos Simoes; Brian Duggan; Mark W Ruddock; Cherith N Reid; Owen Roddy; Lisa White; Hugh F O'Kane; Declan O'Rourke; Neil H Anderson; Thiagarajan Nambirajan; Kate E Williamson
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2013-01-17       Impact factor: 8.775

8.  Follow-up strategies following completion of primary cancer treatment in adult cancer survivors.

Authors:  Beverley L Høeg; Pernille E Bidstrup; Randi V Karlsen; Anne Sofie Friberg; Vanna Albieri; Susanne O Dalton; Lena Saltbæk; Klaus Kaae Andersen; Trine Allerslev Horsboel; Christoffer Johansen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-11-21

9.  The diagnostic accuracy of urine-based tests for bladder cancer varies greatly by patient.

Authors:  Ajay Gopalakrishna; Thomas A Longo; Joseph J Fantony; Richmond Owusu; Wen-Chi Foo; Rajesh Dash; Brant A Inman
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2016-06-13       Impact factor: 2.264

10.  Copy Number Variations of CEP63, FOSL2 and PAQR6 Serve as Novel Signatures for the Prognosis of Bladder Cancer.

Authors:  Zhao Cai; Huang Chen; Jingqiao Bai; Yang Zheng; Jianhui Ma; Xiongwei Cai; Yu Liu; Kaitai Zhang; Jianzhong Shou; Yanning Gao
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-05-10       Impact factor: 6.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.