OBJECTIVE: To assess the ability of reflex UroVysion fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) testing to predict recurrence and progression in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) with suspicious cytology but negative cystoscopy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients under NMIBC surveillance were followed with office cystoscopy and urinary cytology every 3-6 months. Between March 2007 and February 2012, 500 consecutive patients with suspicious cytology underwent reflex FISH analysis. Clinical and pathological data were reviewed retrospectively. Predictors for recurrence, progression and findings on subsequent cystoscopy (within 2-6 months after FISH) were evaluated using univariate and multivariate Cox regression. RESULTS: In all, 243 patients with suspicious cytology also had negative surveillance cystoscopy. Positive FISH was a significant predictor of recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.35, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.42-3.90, P = 0.001) in multivariate analysis and for progression (HR = 3.01, 95% CI: 1.10-8.21, P = 0.03) in univariate analysis, compared with negative FISH. However, positive FISH was not significantly associated with evidence of tumour on subsequent surveillance cystoscopy compared with negative FISH (odds ratio = 0.8, 95% CI: 0.26-2.74, P = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Positive FISH predicts recurrence and progression in patients under NMIBC surveillance with suspicious cytology but negative cystoscopy. However, there was no association between the FISH result and tumour recurrence in the immediate follow-up period. Reflex FISH testing for suspicious cytology might have limited ability to modify surveillance strategies in NMIBC.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the ability of reflex UroVysion fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) testing to predict recurrence and progression in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) with suspicious cytology but negative cystoscopy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients under NMIBC surveillance were followed with office cystoscopy and urinary cytology every 3-6 months. Between March 2007 and February 2012, 500 consecutive patients with suspicious cytology underwent reflex FISH analysis. Clinical and pathological data were reviewed retrospectively. Predictors for recurrence, progression and findings on subsequent cystoscopy (within 2-6 months after FISH) were evaluated using univariate and multivariate Cox regression. RESULTS: In all, 243 patients with suspicious cytology also had negative surveillance cystoscopy. Positive FISH was a significant predictor of recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.35, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.42-3.90, P = 0.001) in multivariate analysis and for progression (HR = 3.01, 95% CI: 1.10-8.21, P = 0.03) in univariate analysis, compared with negative FISH. However, positive FISH was not significantly associated with evidence of tumour on subsequent surveillance cystoscopy compared with negative FISH (odds ratio = 0.8, 95% CI: 0.26-2.74, P = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Positive FISH predicts recurrence and progression in patients under NMIBC surveillance with suspicious cytology but negative cystoscopy. However, there was no association between the FISH result and tumour recurrence in the immediate follow-up period. Reflex FISH testing for suspicious cytology might have limited ability to modify surveillance strategies in NMIBC.
Authors: Marek Skacel; Mona Fahmy; Jennifer A Brainard; James D Pettay; Charles V Biscotti; Louis S Liou; Gary W Procop; J Stephen Jones; James Ulchaker; Craig D Zippe; Raymond R Tubbs Journal: J Urol Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 7.450
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: Pierre I Karakiewicz; Serge Benayoun; Craig Zippe; Gerson Lüdecke; Hans Boman; Marta Sanchez-Carbayo; Roberto Casella; Christine Mian; Martin G Friedrich; Sanaa Eissa; Hideyuki Akaza; Hartwig Huland; Hans Hedelin; Raina Rupesh; Naoto Miyanaga; Arthur I Sagalowsky; Michael J Marberger; Shahrokh F Shariat Journal: BJU Int Date: 2006-03-17 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: Ashish M Kamat; Joaquim Bellmunt; Matthew D Galsky; Badrinath R Konety; Donald L Lamm; David Langham; Cheryl T Lee; Matthew I Milowsky; Michael A O'Donnell; Peter H O'Donnell; Daniel P Petrylak; Padmanee Sharma; Eila C Skinner; Guru Sonpavde; John A Taylor; Prasanth Abraham; Jonathan E Rosenberg Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2017-08-15 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: Francesco Soria; Michael J Droller; Yair Lotan; Paolo Gontero; David D'Andrea; Kilian M Gust; Morgan Rouprêt; Marek Babjuk; Joan Palou; Shahrokh F Shariat Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-06-21 Impact factor: 4.226