Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Urine Cytology and Existing Urinary Biomarkers for Bladder Cancer

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Precision Molecular Pathology of Bladder Cancer

Part of the book series: Molecular Pathology Library ((MPLB))

  • 950 Accesses

Abstract

Urine-based testing would seem to be the obvious diagnostic choice for bladder cancer. Conceptually, an ideal diagnostic test would be simple and application of the test would determine if the disease is present or absent. However, like all diagnostic tests for cancer, urine-based tests for bladder cancer suffer from poor performance, limited clinical utility, and the potential for introducing harm. Consequently, none are universally recommended diagnostic tests for use in the evaluation of patients at risk of having bladder cancer [1–3]. Despite this fact, extensive investment into the research and development of urine-based technologies promising to be better bladder cancer tests continues to be made [4].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Babjuk M, Burger M, Zigeuner R, et al. EAU guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: update 2013. Eur Urol. 2013;64(4):639–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hall MC, Chang SS, Dalbagni G, et al. Guideline for the management of nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (stages Ta, T1, and Tis): 2007 update. J Urol. 2007;178(6):2314–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Davis R, Jones JS, Barocas DA, et al. Diagnosis, evaluation and follow-up of asymptomatic microhematuria (AMH) in adults: AUA guideline. J Urol. 2012;188(6 Suppl):2473–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schmitz-Drager BJ, Droller M, Lokeshwar VB, et al. Molecular markers for bladder cancer screening, early diagnosis, and surveillance: the WHO/ICUD consensus. Urol Int. 2015;94(1):1–24.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155(8):529–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bossuyt PM, Cohen JF, Gatsonis CA, Korevaar DA. STARD 2015: updated reporting guidelines for all diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Transl Med. 2016;4(4):85.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Pepe MS. The statistical evaluation of medical tests for classification and prediction. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Altman DG. Suboptimal analysis using ‘optimal’ cutpoints. Br J Cancer. 1998;78(4):556–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Altman DG, Royston P. The cost of dichotomising continuous variables. BMJ. 2006;332(7549):1080.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Lachs MS, Nachamkin I, Edelstein PH, Goldman J, Feinstein AR, Schwartz JS. Spectrum bias in the evaluation of diagnostic tests: lessons from the rapid dipstick test for urinary tract infection. Ann Intern Med. 1992;117(2):135–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mulherin SA, Miller WC. Spectrum bias or spectrum effect? Subgroup variation in diagnostic test evaluation. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137(7):598–602.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gopalakrishna A, Longo TA, Fantony JJ, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of urine-based tests for bladder cancer varies greatly by patient. BMC Urol. 2016;16(1):30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. van der Aa MN, Steyerberg EW, Bangma C, van Rhijn BW, Zwarthoff EC, van der Kwast TH. Cystoscopy revisited as the gold standard for detecting bladder cancer recurrence: diagnostic review bias in the randomized, prospective CEFUB trial. J Urol. 2010;183(1):76–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fradet Y, Grossman HB, Gomella L, et al. A comparison of hexaminolevulinate fluorescence cystoscopy and white light cystoscopy for the detection of carcinoma in situ in patients with bladder cancer: a phase III, multicenter study. J Urol. 2007;178(1):68–73. discussion 73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Grossman HB, Gomella L, Fradet Y, et al. A phase III, multicenter comparison of hexaminolevulinate fluorescence cystoscopy and white light cystoscopy for the detection of superficial papillary lesions in patients with bladder cancer. J Urol. 2007;178(1):62–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Naito S, Algaba F, Babjuk M, et al. The clinical research office of the endourological society (CROES) multicentre randomised trial of narrow band imaging-assisted transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT) versus conventional white light imaging-assisted TURBT in primary non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer patients: trial protocol and 1-year results. Eur Urol. 2016;70(3):506–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Casey RG, Catto JW, Cheng L, et al. Diagnosis and management of urothelial carcinoma in situ of the lower urinary tract: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2015;67(5):876–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Clark PE, Agarwal N, Biagioli MC, et al. Bladder cancer. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2013;11(4):446–75.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Chang SS, Boorjian SA, Chou R, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: AUA/SUO guideline. J Urol. 2016;196(4):1021–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Begg CB, Greenes RA. Assessment of diagnostic tests when disease verification is subject to selection bias. Biometrics. 1983;39(1):207–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Fantony JJ, Inman BA. It may be time to abandon urine tests for bladder cancer. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2015;13(9):1163–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. McCroskey Z, Pambuccian SE, Kleitherms S, et al. Accuracy and interobserver variability of the cytologic diagnosis of low-grade urothelial carcinoma in instrumented urinary tract cytology specimens. Am J Clin Pathol. 2015;144(6):902–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Reid MD, Osunkoya AO, Siddiqui MT, Looney SW. Accuracy of grading of urothelial carcinoma on urine cytology: an analysis of interobserver and intraobserver agreement. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2012;5(9):882–91.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Babjuk M, Bohle A, Burger M, et al. EAU guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: update 2016. Eur Urol. 2017;71(3):447–61.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Chang SS, Boorjian SA, Chou R, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: AUA/SUO guideline; 2016. Accessed 28 April 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sarosdy MF, Schellhammer P, Bokinsky G, et al. Clinical evaluation of a multi-target fluorescent in situ hybridization assay for detection of bladder cancer. J Urol. 2002;168(5):1950–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Yoder BJ, Skacel M, Hedgepeth R, et al. 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. Am J Clin Pathol. 2007;127(2):295–301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Fitzmaurice GM. Applied longitudinal analysis. New York: Wiley; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Gopalakrishna A, Fantony JJ, Longo TA, et al. Anticipatory positive urine tests for bladder cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(6):1747–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ransohoff DF, Feinstein AR. Problems of spectrum and bias in evaluating the efficacy of diagnostic tests. N Engl J Med. 1978;299(17):926–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Elie C, Coste J. A methodological framework to distinguish spectrum effects from spectrum biases and to assess diagnostic and screening test accuracy for patient populations: application to the Papanicolaou cervical cancer smear test. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8:7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Willis BH. Spectrum bias--why clinicians need to be cautious when applying diagnostic test studies. Fam Pract. 2008;25(5):390–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Standards for reporting of diagnostic accuracy. Clin Chem. 2003;49(1):1–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Giard RW, Hermans J. The diagnostic information of tests for the detection of cancer: the usefulness of the likelihood ratio concept. Eur J Cancer. 1996;32A(12):2042–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Mishriki SF, Vint R, Somani BK. Half of visible and half of recurrent visible hematuria cases have underlying pathology: prospective large cohort study with long-term followup. J Urol. 2012;187(5):1561–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Khadra MH, Pickard RS, Charlton M, Powell PH, Neal DE. A prospective analysis of 1,930 patients with hematuria to evaluate current diagnostic practice. J Urol. 2000;163(2):524–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Edwards TJ, Dickinson AJ, Natale S, Gosling J, McGrath JS. A prospective analysis of the diagnostic yield resulting from the attendance of 4020 patients at a protocol-driven haematuria clinic. BJU Int. 2006;97(2):301–5. discussion 305

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Sutton JM. Evaluation of hematuria in adults. JAMA. 1990;263(18):2475–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Mariani AJ, Mariani MC, Macchioni C, Stams UK, Hariharan A, Moriera A. The significance of adult hematuria: 1,000 hematuria evaluations including a risk-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis. J Urol. 1989;141(2):350–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Rodgers M, Nixon J, Hempel S, et al. Diagnostic tests and algorithms used in the investigation of haematuria: systematic reviews and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2006;10(18):iii–v. xi-259

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Madeb R, Golijanin D, Knopf J, et al. Long-term outcome of patients with a negative work-up for asymptomatic microhematuria. Urology. 2010;75(1):20–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Madeb R, Messing EM. Long-term outcome of home dipstick testing for hematuria. World J Urol. 2008;26(1):19–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Messing EM, Young TB, Hunt VB, et al. Comparison of bladder cancer outcome in men undergoing hematuria home screening versus those with standard clinical presentations. Urology. 1995;45(3):387–96. discussion 396–387

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Inman BA, Abern MR. Interpreting a study on bladder cancer screening. Eur Urol. 2013;64(1):48–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Hedelin H, Jonsson K, Salomonsson K, Boman H. Screening for bladder tumours in men aged 60-70 years with a bladder tumour marker (UBC) and dipstick-detected haematuria using both white-light and fluorescence cystoscopy. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2006;40(1):26–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Bangma CH, Loeb S, Busstra M, et al. Outcomes of a bladder cancer screening program using home hematuria testing and molecular markers. Eur Urol. 2013;64(1):41–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Sanders W. Cancer of the bladder fragments forming urethral plugs discharged in urine: concentric colloid bodies. Edinb J Med. 1864;10:273–4.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Papanicolaou GN, Marshall VF. Urine sediment smears as a diagnostic procedure in cancers of the urinary tract. Science. 1945;101(2629):519–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Raitanen M-P, Aine R, Rintala E, et al. Differences between local and review urinary cytology in diagnosis of bladder cancer. An interobserver multicenter analysis. Eur Urol. 2002;41(3):284–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Glatz K, Willi N, Glatz D, et al. An international telecytologic quiz on urinary cytology reveals educational deficits and absence of a commonly used classification system. Am J Clin Pathol. 2006;126(2):294–301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Mokhtar GA, Al-Dousari M, Al-Ghamedi D. Diagnostic significance of atypical category in the voided urine samples: a retrospective study in a tertiary care center. Urol Ann. 2010;2(3):100–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Brimo F, Vollmer RT, Case B, Aprikian A, Kassouf W, Auger M. Accuracy of urine cytology and the significance of an atypical category. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009;132(5):785–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Nabi G, Greene D, O’Donnell MO. Suspicious urinary cytology with negative evaluation for malignancy in the diagnostic investigation of haematuria: how to follow up? J Clin Pathol. 2004;57(4):365–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Raitanen MP, Aine R, Kylmala T, et al. The dilemma of suspicious urine cytology in patients being followed for bladder cancer. Ann Chir Gynaecol. 2001;90(4):256–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Raab SS, Grzybicki DM, Vrbin CM, Geisinger KR. Urine cytology discrepancies: frequency, causes, and outcomes. Am J Clin Pathol. 2007;127(6):946–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Yafi FA, Brimo F, Steinberg J, Aprikian AG, Tanguay S, Kassouf W. Prospective analysis of sensitivity and specificity of urinary cytology and other urinary biomarkers for bladder cancer. Urol Oncol. 2015;33(2):66.e25–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Lokeshwar VB, Habuchi T, Grossman HB, et al. Bladder tumor markers beyond cytology: international consensus panel on bladder tumor markers. Urology. 2005;66(6 Suppl 1):35–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Bubendorf L, Piaton E. UroVysion(R) multiprobe FISH in the triage of equivocal urinary cytology cases. Ann Pathol. 2012;32(6):e52–6. 438–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Longo TA, Gopalakrishna A, Fantony JJ, et al. Defining an anticipatory positive test using urine bladder cancer tests. In Annual meeting of the SouthEastern section of the American urological association. 2016. Nashville, TN, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Barkan GA, Wojcik EM, Nayar R, et al. The Paris system for reporting urinary cytology: the quest to develop a standardized terminology. Adv Anat Pathol. 2016;23(4):193–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Xie Q, Huang Z, Zhu Z, et al. Diagnostic value of urine cytology in bladder cancer. A meta-analysis. Anal Quant Cytopathol Histopathol. 2016;38(1):38–44.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Badalament RA, Kimmel M, Gay H, et al. The sensitivity of flow cytometry compared with conventional cytology in the detection of superficial bladder carcinoma. Cancer. 1987;59(12):2078–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Brown FM. Urine cytology. It is still the gold standard for screening? Urol Clin N Am. 2000;27(1):25–37.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Gregoire M, Fradet Y, Meyer F, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of urinary cytology, and deoxyribonucleic acid flow cytometry and cytology on bladder washings during followup for bladder tumors. J Urol. 1997;157(5):1660–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Lotan Y, Roehrborn CG. Sensitivity and specificity of commonly available bladder tumor markers versus cytology: results of a comprehensive literature review and meta-analyses. Urology. 2003;61(1):109–18. discussion 118

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Farrow GM. Urine cytology in the detection of bladder cancer: a critical approach. J Occup Med. 1990;32(9):817–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Yafi FA, Brimo F, Auger M, Aprikian A, Tanguay S, Kassouf W. Is the performance of urinary cytology as high as reported historically? A contemporary analysis in the detection and surveillance of bladder cancer. Urol Oncol. 2014;32(1):27.e21–6.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Musser JE, O'Shaughnessy MJ, Kim PH, Herr HW. Bladder biopsy of normal-appearing mucosa is not helpful in patients with unexplained positive cytology after nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer. J Urol. 2015;193(1):48–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Planz B, Jochims E, Deix T, Caspers HP, Jakse G, Boecking A. The role of urinary cytology for detection of bladder cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2005;31(3):304–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Murphy WM, Soloway MS, Jukkola AF, Crabtree WN, Ford KS. Urinary cytology and bladder cancer. The cellular features of transitional cell neoplasms. Cancer. 1984;53(7):1555–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Flanagan MJ, Miller A. Evaluation of bladder washing cytology for bladder cancer surveillance. J Urol. 1978;119(1):42–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Herr HW, Regan M. Urine cytology after flexible cystoscopy. BJU Int. 2005;96(6):796–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. McVey RJ, Persad RV, Brown SC, Robinson E, Payne SR. How long is urinary cytology abnormal after flexible cystoscopy? BJU Int. 2004;94(4):548–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Ramaekers FCS, Hopman AHN. Detection of genetic aberrations in bladder cancer using in situ hybridization. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993;677:199–213.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Wheeless LL, Reeder JE, Han R, et al. Bladder irrigation specimens assayed by fluorescence in situ hybridization to interphase nuclei. Cytometry. 1994;17(4):319–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Meloni AM, Peier AM, Haddad FS, et al. A new approach in the diagnosis and follow-up of bladder cancer. FISH analysis of urine, bladder washings, and tumors. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 1993;71(2):105–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Halling KC, King W, Sokolova IA, et al. A comparison of cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization for the detection of urothelial carcinoma. J Urol. 2000;164(5):1768–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Chou R, Gore JL, Buckley D, et al. Urinary biomarkers for diagnosis of bladder cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysisurinary biomarkers for diagnosis of bladder cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163(12):922–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Halling KC, King W, Sokolova IA, et al. A comparison of BTA stat, hemoglobin dipstick, telomerase and Vysis UroVysion assays for the detection of urothelial carcinoma in urine. J Urol. 2002;167(5):2001–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Hajdinjak T. UroVysion FISH test for detecting urothelial cancers: meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy and comparison with urinary cytology testing. Urol Oncol. 2008;26(6):646–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Kamat AM, Dickstein RJ, Messetti F, et al. Use of fluorescence in situ hybridization to predict response to bacillus Calmette-Guerin therapy for bladder cancer: results of a prospective trial. J Urol. 2012;187(3):862–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. Mengual L, Marin-Aguilera M, Ribal MJ, et al. Clinical utility of fluorescent in situ hybridization for the surveillance of bladder cancer patients treated with bacillus Calmette-Guerin therapy. Eur Urol. 2007;52(3):752–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Whitson J, Berry A, Carroll P, Konety B. A multicolour fluorescence in situ hybridization test predicts recurrence in patients with high-risk superficial bladder tumours undergoing intravesical therapy. BJU Int. 2009;104(3):336–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Kipp BR, Karnes RJ, Brankley SM, et al. Monitoring intravesical therapy for superficial bladder cancer using fluorescence in situ hybridization. J Urol. 2005;173(2):401–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Savic S, Zlobec I, Thalmann GN, et al. The prognostic value of cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization in the follow-up of nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer after intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guerin therapy. J Int cancer. 2009;124(12):2899–904.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Sarosdy MF, Kahn PR, Ziffer MD, et al. Use of a multitarget fluorescence in situ hybridization assay to diagnose bladder cancer in patients with hematuria. J Urol. 2006;176(1):44–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Fritsche HM, Burger M, Dietmaier W, et al. Multicolor FISH (UroVysion) facilitates follow-up of patients with high-grade urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Am J Clin Pathol. 2010;134(4):597–603.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Karnwal A, Venegas R, Shuch B, Bassett J, Rajfer J, Reznichek R. The role of fluorescence in situ hybridization assay for surveillance of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. Can J Urol. 2010;17(2):5077–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Schlomer BJ, Ho R, Sagalowsky A, Ashfaq R, Lotan Y. 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. J Urol. 2010;183(1):62–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Ferra S, Denley R, Herr H, Dalbagni G, Jhanwar S, Lin O. Reflex UroVysion testing in suspicious urine cytology cases. Cancer. 2009;117(1):7–14.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Skacel M, Fahmy M, Brainard JA, et al. Multitarget fluorescence in situ hybridization assay detects transitional cell carcinoma in the majority of patients with bladder cancer and atypical or negative urine cytology. J Urol. 2003;169(6):2101–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Lotan Y, Bensalah K, Ruddell T, Shariat SF, Sagalowsky AI, Ashfaq R. 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. J Urol. 2008;179(6):2164–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Gayed BA, Seideman C, Lotan Y. Cost-effectiveness of fluorescence in situ hybridization in patients with atypical cytology for the detection of urothelial carcinoma. J Urol. 2013;190(4):1181–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Kinders R, Jones T, Root R, et al. Complement factor H or a related protein is a marker for transitional cell cancer of the bladder. Clin Cancer Res. 1998;4(10):2511–20.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Sarosdy MF, deVere White RW, Soloway MS, et al. Results of a multicenter trial using the BTA test to monitor for and diagnose recurrent bladder cancer. J Urol. 1995;154(2 Pt 1):379–83. discussion 383-374

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. D’Hallewin MA, Baert L. Initial evaluation of the bladder tumor antigen test in superficial bladder cancer. J Urol. 1996;155(2):475–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Johnston B, Morales A, Emerson L, Lundie M. Rapid protection of bladder cancer: a comparative study of point of care tests. J Urol. 1997;158(6):2098–101.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Guo A, Wang X, Gao L, Shi J, Sun C, Wan Z. Bladder tumour antigen (BTA stat) test compared to the urine cytology in the diagnosis of bladder cancer: a meta-analysis. Canadian Urol Assoc J. 2014;8(5–6):E347–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Lokeshwar VB, Soloway MS. Current bladder tumor tests: does their projected utility fulfill clinical necessity? J Urol. 2001;165(4):1067–77.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Blumenstein BA, Ellis WJ, Ishak LM. The relationship between serial measurements of the level of a bladder tumor associated antigen and the potential for recurrence. J Urol. 1999;161(1):57–60. discussion 60-51

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Babjuk M, Soukup V, Pesl M, et al. Urinary cytology and quantitative BTA and UBC tests in surveillance of patients with pTapT1 bladder urothelial carcinoma. Urology. 2008;71(4):718–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Lokeshwar VB, Schroeder GL, Selzer MG, et al. Bladder tumor markers for monitoring recurrence and screening comparison of hyaluronic acid-hyaluronidase and BTA-Stat tests. Cancer. 2002;95(1):61–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Ludecke G, Pilatz A, Hauptmann A, Bschleipfer T, Weidner W. Comparative analysis of sensitivity to blood in the urine for urine-based point-of-care assays (UBC rapid, NMP22 BladderChek and BTA-stat) in primary diagnosis of bladder carcinoma. Interference of blood on the results of urine-based POC tests. Anticancer Res. 2012;32(5):2015–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Pode D, Shapiro A, Wald M, Nativ O, Laufer M, Kaver I. Noninvasive detection of bladder cancer with the BTA stat test. J Urol. 1999;161(2):443–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Glas AS, Roos D, Deutekom M, Zwinderman AH, Bossuyt PM, Kurth KH. Tumor markers in the diagnosis of primary bladder cancer. A systematic review. J Urol. 2003;169(6):1975–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Soloway MS, Briggman V, Carpinito GA, et al. Use of a new tumor marker, urinary NMP22, in the detection of occult or rapidly recurring transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary tract following surgical treatment. J Urol. 1996;156(2 Pt 1):363–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Carpinito GA, Stadler WM, Briggman JV, et al. Urinary nuclear matrix protein as a marker for transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary tract. J Urol. 1996;156(4):1280–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Miyanaga N, Akaza H, Ishikawa S, et al. Clinical evaluation of nuclear matrix protein 22 (NMP22) in urine as a novel marker for urothelial cancer. Eur Urol. 1997;31(2):163–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Poulakis V, Witzsch U, De Vries R, Altmannsberger HM, Manyak MJ, Becht E. A comparison of urinary nuclear matrix protein-22 and bladder tumour antigen tests with voided urinary cytology in detecting and following bladder cancer: the prognostic value of false-positive results. BJU Int. 2001;88(7):692–701.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Sanchez-Carbayo M, Urrutia M, Silva JM, Romani R, De Buitrago JM, Navajo JA. Comparative predictive values of urinary cytology, urinary bladder cancer antigen, CYFRA 21-1 and NMP22 for evaluating symptomatic patients at risk for bladder cancer. J Urol. 2001;165(5):1462–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Giannopoulos A, Manousakas T, Mitropoulos D, et al. Comparative evaluation of the BTAstat test, NMP22, and voided urine cytology in the detection of primary and recurrent bladder tumors. Urology. 2000;55(6):871–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Ponsky LE, Sharma S, Pandrangi L, et al. Screening and monitoring for bladder cancer: refining the use of NMP22. J Urol. 2001;166(1):75–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Sharma S, Zippe CD, Pandrangi L, Nelson D, Agarwal A. Exclusion criteria enhance the specificity and positive predictive value of NMP22 and BTA stat. J Urol. 1999;162(1):53–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Joung JY, Park S, Yoon H, et al. Overestimation of nuclear matrix protein 22 in concentrated urine. Urology. 2013;82(5):1059–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Fradet Y, Lockhard C. Performance characteristics of a new monoclonal antibody test for bladder cancer: immunoCyt trade mark. Can J Urol. 1997;4(3):400–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Mian C, Pycha A, Wiener H, Haitel A, Lodde M, Marberger M. Immunocyt: a new tool for detecting transitional cell cancer of the urinary tract. J Urol. 1999;161(5):1486–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Mian C, Maier K, Comploj E, et al. uCyt+/ImmunoCyt in the detection of recurrent urothelial carcinoma: an update on 1991 analyses. Cancer. 2006;108(1):60–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Tetu B, Tiguert R, Harel F, Fradet Y. ImmunoCyt/uCyt+ improves the sensitivity of urine cytology in patients followed for urothelial carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 2005;18(1):83–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Greene KL, Berry A, Konety BR. Diagnostic utility of the immunoCyt/uCyt+ test in bladder cancer. Rev Urol. 2006;8(4):190–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  120. Vriesema JL, Atsma F, Kiemeney LA, Peelen WP, Witjes JA, Schalken JA. Diagnostic efficacy of the ImmunoCyt test to detect superficial bladder cancer recurrence. Urology. 2001;58(3):367–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Messing EM, Teot L, Korman H, et al. Performance of urine test in patients monitored for recurrence of bladder cancer: a multicenter study in the United States. J Urol. 2005;174(4 Pt 1):1238–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Piaton E, Daniel L, Verriele V, et al. Improved detection of urothelial carcinomas with fluorescence immunocytochemistry (uCyt+ assay) and urinary cytology: results of a French prospective multicenter study. Laboratory investigation. J Tech Methods Pathol. 2003;83(6):845–52.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  123. Holyoake A, O'Sullivan P, Pollock R, et al. Development of a multiplex RNA urine test for the detection and stratification of transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14(3):742–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. O'Sullivan P, Sharples K, Dalphin M, et al. A multigene urine test for the detection and stratification of bladder cancer in patients presenting with hematuria. J Urol. 2012;188(3):741–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Chou R, Buckley D, Fu R, et al. AHRQ comparative effectiveness reviews. In:Emerging approaches to diagnosis and treatment of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  126. Kavalieris L, O'Sullivan PJ, Suttie JM, et al. A segregation index combining phenotypic (clinical characteristics) and genotypic (gene expression) biomarkers from a urine sample to triage out patients presenting with hematuria who have a low probability of urothelial carcinoma. BMC Urol. 2015;15:23.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  127. Breen V, Kasabov N, Kamat AM, et al. A holistic comparative analysis of diagnostic tests for urothelial carcinoma: a study of Cxbladder detect, UroVysion(R) FISH, NMP22(R) and cytology based on imputation of multiple datasets. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015;15:45.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  128. Sylvester RJ, van der Meijden AP, Oosterlinck W, et al. Predicting recurrence and progression in individual patients with stage ta t1 bladder cancer using EORTC risk tables: a combined analysis of 2596 patients from seven EORTC trials. Eur Urol. 2006;49(3):466–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Sonnenberg FA, Wong JB. Commentary: fine-tuning life-expectancy calculations using Markov processes. Med Decis Mak. 1993;13(2):170–2.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Urology, Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Box 103868, Durham, NC, 27710, USA

    Thomas A. Longo, Steven C. Brousell & Brant A. Inman

Authors
  1. Thomas A. Longo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steven C. Brousell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Brant A. Inman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brant A. Inman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pathology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA

    Donna E. Hansel

  2. Scott Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA

    Seth P. Lerner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Longo, T.A., Brousell, S.C., Inman, B.A. (2018). Urine Cytology and Existing Urinary Biomarkers for Bladder Cancer. In: Hansel, D., Lerner, S. (eds) Precision Molecular Pathology of Bladder Cancer. Molecular Pathology Library. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64769-2_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64769-2_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-64767-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-64769-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation