PURPOSE: Accurate urine assays for bladder cancer detection would benefit patients and health care systems. Through extensive genomic and proteomic profiling of urine components we previously identified a panel of 8 biomarkers that can facilitate the detection of bladder cancer in voided urine samples. In this study we confirmed this diagnostic molecular signature in a diverse multicenter cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a case-control, phase II study in which we analyzed voided urine from 102 subjects with bladder cancer and 206 with varying urological disorders. The urinary concentration of 8 biomarkers (IL-8, MMP-9 and 10, PAI-1, VEGF, ANG, CA9 and APOE) was assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Diagnostic performance of the panel of tested biomarkers was evaluated using ROCs and descriptive statistical values, eg sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: Seven of the 8 urine biomarkers were increased in subjects with bladder cancer relative to those without bladder cancer. The 7 biomarkers were assessed in a new model, which had an AUROC of 0.88 (95% CI 0.84-0.93), and 74% sensitivity and 90% specificity. In contrast, the sensitivity of voided urine cytology and the UroVysion® cytogenetic test in this cohort was 39% and 54%, respectively. Study limitations include analysis performed on banked urine samples and the lack of voided urine cytology and cytogenetic test data on controls. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides further evidence that the reported panel of diagnostic biomarkers can reliably achieve the noninvasive detection of bladder cancer with higher sensitivity than currently available urine based assays.
PURPOSE: Accurate urine assays for bladder cancer detection would benefit patients and health care systems. Through extensive genomic and proteomic profiling of urine components we previously identified a panel of 8 biomarkers that can facilitate the detection of bladder cancer in voided urine samples. In this study we confirmed this diagnostic molecular signature in a diverse multicenter cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a case-control, phase II study in which we analyzed voided urine from 102 subjects with bladder cancer and 206 with varying urological disorders. The urinary concentration of 8 biomarkers (IL-8, MMP-9 and 10, PAI-1, VEGF, ANG, CA9 and APOE) was assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Diagnostic performance of the panel of tested biomarkers was evaluated using ROCs and descriptive statistical values, eg sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: Seven of the 8 urine biomarkers were increased in subjects with bladder cancer relative to those without bladder cancer. The 7 biomarkers were assessed in a new model, which had an AUROC of 0.88 (95% CI 0.84-0.93), and 74% sensitivity and 90% specificity. In contrast, the sensitivity of voided urine cytology and the UroVysion® cytogenetic test in this cohort was 39% and 54%, respectively. Study limitations include analysis performed on banked urine samples and the lack of voided urine cytology and cytogenetic test data on controls. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides further evidence that the reported panel of diagnostic biomarkers can reliably achieve the noninvasive detection of bladder cancer with higher sensitivity than currently available urine based assays.
Authors: Vinata B Lokeshwar; Tomonori Habuchi; H Barton Grossman; William M Murphy; Stefan H Hautmann; George P Hemstreet; Aldo V Bono; Robert H Getzenberg; Peter Goebell; Bernd J Schmitz-Dräger; Jack A Schalken; Yves Fradet; Michael Marberger; Edward Messing; Michael J Droller Journal: Urology Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Patrick M Bossuyt; Johannes B Reitsma; David E Bruns; Constantine A Gatsonis; Paul P Glasziou; Les M Irwig; Jeroen G Lijmer; David Moher; Drummond Rennie; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: Fam Pract Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 2.267
Authors: Paul N Span; Johannes A Witjes; Nicolai Grebenchtchikov; Anneke Geurts-Moespot; Paula M J Moonen; Tilly W Aalders; Jessica L J Vriesema; Lambertus A L M Kiemeney; Jack A Schalken; Fred C G J Sweep Journal: BJU Int Date: 2008-07-01 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Michael F Sarosdy; Paul Schellhammer; Gary Bokinsky; Paul Kahn; Roberto Chao; Lawrence Yore; Joseph Zadra; Daniel Burzon; Gerald Osher; Julia A Bridge; Steven Anderson; Sonny L Johansson; Michael Lieber; Mark Soloway; Kerry Flom Journal: J Urol Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Maria Frantzi; Agnieszka Latosinska; Leif Flühe; Marie C Hupe; Elena Critselis; Mario W Kramer; Axel S Merseburger; Harald Mischak; Antonia Vlahou Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2015-05-26 Impact factor: 14.432
Authors: Li-Mei Chen; Myron Chang; Yunfeng Dai; Karl X Chai; Lars Dyrskjøt; Marta Sanchez-Carbayo; Tibor Szarvas; Ellen C Zwarthoff; Vinata Lokeshwar; Carmen Jeronimo; Alexander S Parker; Shanti Ross; Michael Borre; Torben F Orntoft; Tobias Jaeger; Willemien Beukers; Luis E Lopez; Rui Henrique; Paul R Young; Virginia Urquidi; Steve Goodison; Charles J Rosser Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-06-11 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Sijia Huang; Lei Kou; Hideki Furuya; Changhong Yu; Steve Goodison; Michael W Kattan; Lana Garmire; Charles J Rosser Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2016-07-06 Impact factor: 4.254