Literature DB >> 20471154

Fluorescence in situ hybridisation in the diagnosis of upper urinary tract tumours.

Christine Mian1, Guido Mazzoleni, Silke Vikoler, Thomas Martini, Ruth Knüchel-Clark, Dirk Zaak, Alexander Lazica, Stephan Roth, Michael Mian, Armin Pycha.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Upper urinary tract (UUT) tumours are often a diagnostic challenge. Because of delayed diagnosis at an advanced stage, prognosis is less qualitative when compared to bladder tumours. There is, therefore, a need for reliable markers to improve diagnosis.
OBJECTIVE: Because of the difficulty in interpreting washing cytologies of the UUT, we evaluated the reliability of fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) in the detection of upper tract urothelial cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective, multicentre cohort study was carried out on 55 consecutive patients with a suspected UUT tumour. MEASUREMENTS: Between May 2007 and May 2009, 55 consecutive patients (mean age 71.7 yr; range: 52-93) with a suspected urinary tract tumour were studied with intravenous pyelography, cytology, washing cytology, ureterorenoscopy, and endoscopic biopsies. The patients were followed for a mean observation time of 12.21 mo (range: 0.5-20; standard deviation: 6.12). A multicolour-FISH approach was performed on a liquid-based washing urinary cytology in all cases. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Twenty-one out of 55 patients had a histologically proven urothelial carcinoma, of which 10 had stage pTa disease, 6 had pT1 disease, 2 had pT2 disease, 2 had pTis disease, and 1 had pTx disease (6 G1, 6 G2, and 9 G3). Three patients had a papilloma, 2 had renal cell carcinoma, 27 had a negative histologic report, and 2 had a nondiagnostic histology. In total, 68 analyses were performed. The cytology was negative or doubtful in 60 out of a total 68 specimens (88.2%) and was suspicious or positive for malignancy in 7 (10.3%) specimens. One specimen was not diagnostic. FISH was negative in 37 of 68 analyses (54.4%) and positive in the other 30 analyses (44.1%). One FISH analysis was not diagnostic as a result of insufficient cellular material. The overall sensitivity of the cytology was 20.8% and of FISH 100%. The specificity was 97.4% for cytology and 89.5% for FISH. Even though this is the largest UUT cohort studied with FISH, the sample size is relatively small.
CONCLUSIONS: The UroVysion FISH test is a reliable method in the diagnosis of UUT tumours in cases with clinical suspicion but negative or doubtful cytology and no diagnostic histology. Copyright (c) 2010 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20471154     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.04.026

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


  17 in total

Review 1.  [Upper tract urothelial carcinoma. An update on clinical and pathological prognostic factors].

Authors:  M Rink; M Adam; J Hansen; F K Chun; S A Ahyai; M Remzi; T Schlomm; O Engel; R Heuer; C Eichelberg; M Fisch; R Dahlem; S F Shariat
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 2.  [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

3.  Upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: what have we learned in the last 4 years?

Authors:  Mesut Remzi; Shahrokh Shariat; Wilhelm Huebner; Harun Fajkovic; Christian Seitz
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2011-04

4.  FISH analysis of washing urine from the upper urinary tract for the detection of urothelial cancers.

Authors:  Torsten Gruschwitz; Mieczyslaw Gajda; Astrid Enkelmann; Marc-Oliver Grimm; Heiko Wunderlich; Marcus Horstmann; Kerstin Junker
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2014-04-22       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 5.  Prognostic factors for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma.

Authors:  Thomas F Chromecki; Karim Bensalah; Mesut Remzi; Grégory Verhoest; Eugene K Cha; Douglas S Scherr; Giacomo Novara; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Shahrokh F Shariat
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-07-05       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 6.  Distinct patterns and behaviour of urothelial carcinoma with respect to anatomical location: how molecular biomarkers can augment clinico-pathological predictors in upper urinary tract tumours.

Authors:  David R Yates; James W F Catto
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-09-18       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Prospective evaluation of fluorescence in situ hybridization for diagnosing urothelial carcinoma.

Authors:  Tianhai Lin; Zhenhua Liu; Liangren Liu; Lu Yang; Ping Han; Peng Zhang; Qiang Wei
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 2.967

8.  [Urine markers with special regard to fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH)].

Authors:  K Lindemann-Docter; N T Gaisa; D Smeets; R Knüchel-Clarke
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 0.639

9.  The role of FISH and cytology in upper urinary tract surveillance after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer.

Authors:  Mario I Fernández; Sahil Parikh; H Barton Grossman; Ruth Katz; Surena F Matin; Colin P N Dinney; Ashish M Kamat
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2011-03-10       Impact factor: 3.498

10.  Prospective evaluation of FISH for detecting upper tract urothelial carcinoma in voided urine specimens.

Authors:  Qiubo Yu; Yanan Li; Gang Li; Tinghong Li; Han Zeng; Zhu Yang; Deling Wang
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2016-05-17       Impact factor: 2.967

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.