Literature DB >> 25420920

Multicenter evaluation of the role of UroVysion FISH assay in surveillance of patients with bladder cancer: does FISH positivity anticipate recurrence?

Casey Seideman1, Daniel Canter, Philip Kim, Billy Cordon, Alon Weizer, Irma Oliva, Jianyu Rao, Brant A Inman, Michael Posch, Harry Herr, Yair Lotan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The significance of a positive UroVysion FISH assay is uncertain in patients with normal cystoscopy. This multicenter study evaluates the clinical significance of a positive FISH assay in patients with no visible tumor and excluding those with a positive cytology.
METHODS: A multi-institutional, retrospective study of patients with a history of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder identified 664 patients with a FISH assay after excluding those with cystoscopic evidence of a tumor and/or positive cytology. Our primary end point was cancer recurrence, defined by biopsy. Progression was defined as recurrence with a tumor stage ≥T2. Statistical analyses were performed using Fisher's exact test as a one-tailed test and Chi-square test with significance at 0.05, using SPSS(®) version 19.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).
RESULTS: Of the 664 patients in this study, tumor stage was Ta (363, 55 %), T1 (183, 28 %), and CIS (109, 16 %) and most were high grade (440 pts, 66 %). The median follow-up was 26 months (3-104 months), and 277 (41.7 %) patients were recurred. In patients who were FISH positive, mean time to recurrence was 12.6 months, compared to 17.9 months if FISH negative (p = 0.03). In univariate analysis, atypical cytology, positive FISH, cystoscopic findings (atypical vs. normal), and previous intravesical therapy were associated with recurrence (p < 0.05). On multivariate analysis, pathologic stage, cystoscopic findings, and cytology were independently associated with recurrence (p < 0.05). Progression to ≥T2 disease occurred in 34 (5.1 %) patients in this cohort. On multivariate analysis, only initial T stage and FISH result were found to be independent predictors of progression (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a positive FISH and atypical cytology are more likely to recur even in the absence of visible tumor. FISH positivity may portend a higher risk for progression. These findings require prospective validation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25420920     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-014-1452-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  16 in total

1.  Bladder tumor markers beyond cytology: International Consensus Panel on bladder tumor markers.

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

2.  Reflex UroVysion testing of bladder cancer surveillance patients with equivocal or negative urine cytology: a prospective study with focus on the natural history of anticipatory positive findings.

Authors:  Brian J Yoder; Marek Skacel; Ryan Hedgepeth; Denise Babineau; James C Ulchaker; Louis S Liou; Jennifer A Brainard; Charles V Biscotti; J Stephen Jones; Raymond R Tubbs
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 2.493

3.  Reduced bladder tumour recurrence rate associated with narrow-band imaging surveillance cystoscopy.

Authors:  Harry W Herr; Sherri M Donat
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2010-08-12       Impact factor: 5.588

4.  Prospective evaluation of the clinical usefulness of reflex fluorescence in situ hybridization assay in patients with atypical cytology for the detection of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder.

Authors:  Yair Lotan; Karim Bensalah; Timothy Ruddell; Shahrokh F Shariat; Arthur I Sagalowsky; Raheela Ashfaq
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2008-04-18       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  NCCN urothelial cancer practice guidelines. National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

Authors:  H Scher; R Bahnson; S Cohen; M Eisenberger; H Herr; J Kozlowski; P Lange; J Montie; A Pollack; D Raghaven; J Richie; W Shipley
Journal:  Oncology (Williston Park)       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 2.990

6.  UroVysion FISH test for detecting urothelial cancers: meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy and comparison with urinary cytology testing.

Authors:  Tine Hajdinjak
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2008-01-15       Impact factor: 3.498

7.  Cancer statistics for Hispanics/Latinos, 2012.

Authors:  Rebecca Siegel; Deepa Naishadham; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 508.702

8.  Differences between local and review urinary cytology in diagnosis of bladder cancer. An interobserver multicenter analysis.

Authors:  Mika-P Raitanen; Risto Aine; Erkki Rintala; Jukka Kallio; Pertti Rajala; Harri Juusela; Teuvo L J Tammela
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  Prospective validation of the clinical usefulness of reflex fluorescence in situ hybridization assay in patients with atypical cytology for the detection of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder.

Authors:  Bruce J Schlomer; Richard Ho; Arthur Sagalowsky; Raheela Ashfaq; Yair Lotan
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Clinical evaluation of a multi-target fluorescent in situ hybridization assay for detection of bladder cancer.

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

View more
  16 in total

1.  Comparison of different concepts for interpretation of chromosomal aberrations in urothelial cells detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization.

Authors:  Johannes Mischinger; Lutz Philipp Guttenberg; Jörg Hennenlotter; Georgios Gakis; Stefan Aufderklamm; Steffen Rausch; Eva Neumann; Jens Bedke; Stefan Kruck; Christian Schwentner; Arnulf Stenzl; Tilman Todenhöfer
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-12-02       Impact factor: 4.553

2.  Novel fluorescence in situ hybridization-based definition of bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) failure for use in enhancing recruitment into clinical trials of intravesical therapies.

Authors:  Ashish M Kamat; Daniel L Willis; Rian J Dickstein; Rooselvelt Anderson; Graciela Nogueras-González; Ruth L Katz; Xifeng Wu; H Barton Grossman; Colin P Dinney
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2015-07-03       Impact factor: 5.588

3.  Detection of Bladder Cancer in Urine Sediments by a Novel Multicolor Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (Quartet) Test.

Authors:  Shizhen Zhang; Yan Wang; Jolanta Bondaruk; Tadeusz Majewski; Hui Yao; Sangkyou Lee; June Goo Lee; David Cogdell; Yair Lotan; Colin Dinney; Peng Wei; Keith Baggerly; Bogdan Czerniak
Journal:  Eur Urol Focus       Date:  2018-02-07

4.  Clinical Evaluation of Two Non-Invasive Genetic Tests for Detection and Monitoring of Urothelial Carcinoma: Validation of UroVysion and Xpert Bladder Cancer Detection Test.

Authors:  Niko Kavcic; Ivan Peric; Andreja Zagorac; Nadja Kokalj Vokac
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-06-06       Impact factor: 4.772

Review 5.  UroVysion fluorescence in situ hybridization in urothelial carcinoma: a narrative review and future perspectives.

Authors:  Takashi Nagai; Taku Naiki; Toshiki Etani; Keitaro Iida; Yusuke Noda; Nobuhiko Shimizu; Teruki Isobe; Satoshi Nozaki; Takehiko Okamura; Ryosuke Ando; Noriyasu Kawai; Takahiro Yasui
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-04

Review 6.  Novel non invasive diagnostic strategies in bladder cancer.

Authors:  Anamaria Truta; Tudor Adrian Hodor Popon; George Saraci; Liviu Ghervan; Ioan Victor Pop
Journal:  Clujul Med       Date:  2016-04-15

7.  Epigenome-Wide DNA Methylation Profiling Identifies Differential Methylation Biomarkers in High-Grade Bladder Cancer.

Authors:  Ekaterina Olkhov-Mitsel; Andrea J Savio; Ken J Kron; Vaijayanti V Pethe; Thomas Hermanns; Neil E Fleshner; Bas W van Rhijn; Theodorus H van der Kwast; Alexandre R Zlotta; Bharati Bapat
Journal:  Transl Oncol       Date:  2017-02-03       Impact factor: 4.243

Review 8.  The contemporary role and impact of urine-based biomarkers in bladder cancer.

Authors:  Igor Duquesne; Lars Weisbach; Atiqullah Aziz; Luis A Kluth; Evanguelos Xylinas
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-12

9.  Longitudinal follow-up and performance validation of an mRNA-based urine test (Xpert® Bladder Cancer Monitor ) for surveillance in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

Authors:  Barrett Cowan; Eric Klein; Ken Jansz; Karl Westenfelder; Timothy Bradford; Chad Peterson; Douglas Scherr; Lawrence I Karsh; Blair Egerdie; Alfred Witjes; Andrew Trainer; Richard Harris; Bernard Goldfarb; Stanley Flax; Robert Kroeger; Buffi Boyd; Joseph Liao; Sanjay Patel; Julia Bridge; Victor Reuter; Neil Quigley; Sarah Brown; Suling Zhao; Malini Satya; Michael Bates; Iris M Simon; Scott Campbell; Yair Lotan
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2021-05-05       Impact factor: 5.969

10.  Nanotechnology and cancer: improving real-time monitoring and staging of bladder cancer with multimodal mesoporous silica nanoparticles.

Authors:  Sean K Sweeney; Yi Luo; Michael A O'Donnell; Jose Assouline
Journal:  Cancer Nanotechnol       Date:  2016-04-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.