| Literature DB >> 32397531 |
Milena Matuszczak1, Maciej Salagierski1.
Abstract
The high occurrence of bladder cancer and its tendency to recur in combination with a lifelong surveillance make the treatment of superficial bladder cancer one of the most expensive and time-consuming. Moreover, carcinoma in situ often leads to muscle invasion with an unfavorable prognosis. Currently, invasive methods including cystoscopy and cytology remain a gold standard. The aim of this study was to explore urine-based biomarkers to find the one with the best specificity and sensitivity, which would allow optimizing the treatment plan. In this review, we sum up the current knowledge about Cytokeratin fragments (CYFRA 21.1), Excision Repair Cross-Complementation 1 (ERCC1), Tumour Protein p53 (Tp53), Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor 3 (FGFR3), Tumor-Associated Trypsin Inhibitor (TATI) and their potential applications in clinical practice.Entities:
Keywords: biomarkers; bladder cancer; prognosis; tumor markers
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32397531 PMCID: PMC7247579 DOI: 10.3390/ijms21093360
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Predictive capacity of bladder cancer biomarkers.
| Protein Name | Gene Symbol | Purpose | Diagnostic Value | Prognostic Value | FDA Approved | Method | Samples Used (No. Patients) | Predicitive Capacity | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CYFRA 21.1 |
| Diagnostic and surveillance | Both serum and urine CYFRA 21.1 levels provide an effective index for the diagnosis of BC. | High risk of malignancy- significantly higher serum level of CYFRA 21.1 according to tumour stage ( | No | Meta-analysis performed using STATA 12.0 on the base of studies had published before 2 November 2014 in EMBASE, Web of Science and Medline databases. Quality of the studies was assessed by revised QUADAS tools, all of selected studies were English language publications and evaluate diagnostic accuracy of CYFRA 21.1 in patients with BC. Systematic review included 13 studies and 1,262 BC and 1,233 non-bladder cancer patients. 8 studies measured urine and 5 serum level of CYFRA 21.1. In serum detection of CYFRA 21.1 471 BC and 296 non- bladder cancer patients were analyzed. Urine CYFRA 21.1 studies included 538 BC and 678 non-bladder cancer patients. | Urine ( | Sensitivity = 82% Specificity = 80% | [ |
| Serum ( | Sensitivity = 42% Specificity = 94% | ||||||||
| DNA EXCISION REPAIR PROTEIN ERCC-1 |
| Diagnostic and surveillance | 71.3% (308/432) of cases was ERCC1 positive. Ta = 3.2% T1 = 11.7% T2 = 21.4% T3 = 45.1% T4 = 18.5% | ERCC positive tumour had significantly better disease-free survival (HR 0.7, | No | Study cohort had 432 patients and 308 of tumours expressed ERCC1. Staining was conducted using Abcam® mouse monoclonal antibody and expression of ERCC1was evaluated by 2 pathologists. Chi-square test was made to assessed differences between ERCC1 expression. All analyses were performed with STATA®, version 13.1. | UCB cell lines in vitro ( | No data | [ |
| TUMOR SUPPRESSOR P53 | Diagnostic (as a complementary tool) and surveillance | 54% (56/103) of cases had TP53 mutations. | High risk of malignancy-significant difference of TP53 mutations according to tumour stage ( | No | Sample collection of urine and tumours from 103 patients. Extraction of mRNA was made by Micro mRNA Purification Kit. Then Verso Kit® were used to reverse transcription, amplification was performed by PCR PrimeStar®. FASAY assay was used to detect | Primary bladder tumours and associated urine ( | Sensitivity = 34% Specificity = 87% | [ | |
| FIBROBLAST GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 3 | Diagnostic (as a complementary tool) and surveillance | 36% (37/103) of cases had FGFR3 mutations. Ta = 55% | Low risk of malignancy-negative association of FGFR3 mutations based on tumour stage ( | No * | Sample collection of urine and tumours from 103 patients. Extraction of genomic DNA was performed by QIAamp Viral RNA® Mini kit. Multiplex PCR Kit were used to amplification. Snapshot ® kit was used to detect FGFR3 eight most frequent mutations hotspots in tumour tissues and urinary cells (two independent analysis were carried out). Statistical test was performed using SPSS software®, version 17. | Primary bladder tumours and associated urine ( | Sensitivity = 43% | [ | |
| Sensitivity = 97.6% | [ | ||||||||
| TUMOR-ASSOCIATED TRYPSIN INHIBITOR | Diagnostic and surveillance | 49.1% (54/110) of cases had TATI expression. | Low risk of malignancy- negative association of TATI expression was positively correlated based on tumour stage ( | No | Study cohort had 110 patients and 54 of tumours, undergone RC, expressed TATI. Staining was conducted using Abcam® anti-TATI monoclonal antibody and expression of TATI was evaluated by 2 pathologists. Proportion of immune-positive cells and their staining intensity was scored in two scales and used to evaluation of TATI expression. All analyses were performed with SPSS software, version 21. | Tissue microarrays from UCB ( | No data | [ | |
| Study cohort consisted of 160 patients, divided into 3 groups. Group 1 had 80 primary HG UBC. Group 2 of 40 healthy volunteers and group 3 of 40 benign UBC. TATI was measured using a radioimmunoassay according to the manufacturer’s instructions (Orion Diagnostica). Analyses were performer with STATA®, statistical software, version 6.0 | Urine ( | Sensitivity = 85.7% | [ |
(1) Using a logistic regression analysis with a model consisting of the 3 markers’ methylation values, FGFR3 status, age and known smoker status at the diagnosis time. * It is available THERASCREEN® FGFR RGQ RT-PCR KIT. Abbreviations: HR—Hazard Ratio, n—number of patients participating in study, p—calculated probability, CIS—carcinoma in situ, HG—high grade, LG—low grade, FASAY—Functional Analysis of Separated Allele in Yeast, ELISA—enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, IHC—immunohistochemistry, RC—radical cystectomy, BC—bladder cancer, CCS—cancer specific survival, DFS—disease-free survival, UCB—urothelial carcinoma of bladder, qPCR—quantitative polymerase chain reaction, PPV—positive predictive value, NPV—negative predictive value.