Literature DB >> 9915409

Comparison of screening methods in the detection of bladder cancer.

S Ramakumar1, J Bhuiyan, J A Besse, S G Roberts, P C Wollan, M L Blute, D J O'Kane.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We prospectively evaluate and compare the sensitivity and specificity of urine cytology, BTA stat, NMP22, fibrin/fibrinogen degradation products (FDP), telomerase, chemiluminescent hemoglobin and hemoglobin dipstick to detect bladder cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single voided specimens were obtained from 57 patients with bladder cancer, and 139 without evidence of bladder malignancy on cystoscopy or a negative biopsy of indeterminate lesions. A cytology report was available for 125 patients and interpreted independently. BTA stat, NMP22 and FDP were analyzed according to manufacturer specifications. The telomerase assay was performed on cells collected from urine by centrifugation in preparation for polymerase chain reaction based amplification using the telomeric repeat amplification protocol assay. The chemiluminescent screening assay for hemoglobin in urine uses the pseudoperoxidase activity of hemoglobin on hydrogen peroxide and subsequent oxidation of 7-dimethylaminonaphthalene-1,2-dicarbonic acid hydrazide to generate chemiluminescence emission. Hemoglobin dipstick was interpreted as positive if the hemoglobin content in the urine was trace or greater.
RESULTS: Overall sensitivity with urine cytology, BTA stat, NMP22, FDP, telomerase, chemiluminescent hemoglobin and the hemoglobin dipstick was 44, 74, 53, 52, 70, 67 and 47%, respectively. Specificity with cytology, telomerase and FDP was high (95, 99 and 91%, respectively) but BTA stat, NMP22 (optimized), chemiluminescent hemoglobin (optimized) and the hemoglobin dipstick demonstrated lower specificity of 73, 60, 63 and 84%, respectively. Stepwise logistic regression analysis revealed that for all tumors, and within each tumor grade and stage telomerase had the strongest association with bladder cancer among all tests (69% overall concordance). Telomerase was also positive in 91% of the patients (10 of 11) with carcinoma in situ.
CONCLUSIONS: Urinary telomerase had the highest combination of sensitivity and specificity (70 and 99%, respectively) for bladder cancer screening in these patients. It was the strongest predictor with superior accuracy in patients with grade 1 and noninvasive tumors (pTa), and extremely useful in patients with carcinoma in situ. Telomerase appears to be promising and outperformed cytology, BTA stat, NMP22, FDP, chemiluminescent hemoglobin and hemoglobin dipstick in the prediction of bladder cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 9915409

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  36 in total

Review 1.  Time to abandon testing for microscopic haematuria in adults?

Authors:  Per-Uno Malmström
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-04-12

Review 2.  Best practice in primary care pathology: review 2.

Authors:  W S Smellie; J O Forth; C A M McNulty; L Hirschowitz; D Lilic; R Gosling; D Bareford; E Logan; K G Kerr; G P Spickett; J Hoffman; A Galloway; C A Bloxham
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 3.  Current Use and Promise of Urinary Markers for Urothelial Cancer.

Authors:  William Tabayoyong; Ashish M Kamat
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2018-10-17       Impact factor: 3.092

4.  Telomerase activity detected by quantitative assay in bladder carcinoma and exfoliated cells in urine.

Authors:  R Fedriga; R Gunelli; O Nanni; F Bacci; D Amadori; D Calistri
Journal:  Neoplasia       Date:  2001 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.715

5.  Urine cytology and adjunct markers for detection and surveillance of bladder cancer.

Authors:  Peggy S Sullivan; Jessica B Chan; Mary R Levin; Jianyu Rao
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2010-07-25       Impact factor: 4.060

6.  External validation of a multiplex urinary protein panel for the detection of bladder cancer in a multicenter cohort.

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

7.  Comparison of the nuclear matrix protein 22 with voided urine cytology in the diagnosis of transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder.

Authors:  Murat Lekili; Ercüment Sener; Mehmet Akif Demir; Gökhan Temeltaş; Talha Müezzinoğlu; Coşkun Büyüksu
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2003-12-19

8.  Critical evaluation of urinary markers for bladder cancer detection and monitoring.

Authors:  Shahrokh F Shariat; Jose A Karam; Yair Lotan; Pierre I Karakiewizc
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2008

9.  In-depth investigation of the molecular pathogenesis of bladder cancer in a unique 26-year old patient with extensive multifocal disease: a case report.

Authors:  Tahlita C M Zuiverloon; Cheno S Abas; Kirstin A van der Keur; Marcel Vermeij; Stephen S Tjin; Angela G van Tilborg; Martijn Busstra; Ellen C Zwarthoff
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2010-02-26       Impact factor: 2.264

Review 10.  [Non-invasive urinary diagnosis of bladder cancer. What do we know?].

Authors:  I Kausch; A Böhle
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2003-04-11       Impact factor: 0.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.