4.6 Article

Combinations of Urinary Biomarkers for Surveillance of Patients with Incident Nonmuscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: The European FP7 UROMOL Project

期刊

JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
卷 189, 期 5, 页码 1945-1951

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.11.115

关键词

urinary bladder; urinary bladder neoplasms; neoplasm recurrence; biological markers; receptor, fibroblast growth factor, type 3

资金

  1. FP7 [201663]
  2. Dutch Cancer Society [2006
  3. 3672]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: We determined a combination of markers with optimal sensitivity to detect recurrence in voided urine after resection of an incident low grade, nonmuscle invasive bladder tumor. Materials and Methods: A total of 136 patients with G1/G2 nonmuscle invasive bladder tumor were included in the study at transurethral resection of the incident tumor. At least 3 followup urine samples were required for patient selection. DNA was extracted from the incident tumor and cell pellets of subsequently collected urine samples. We performed FGFR3, PIK3CA and RAS mutation analysis, and microsatellite and methylation analysis on tissue and urine DNA samples. Results: We obtained 716 urine samples. The 136 patients experienced a total of 552 recurrences during a median 3-year followup. Sensitivity for detecting a recurrent tumor varied between 66% and 68% for the molecular tests after patient stratification based on tumor DNA analysis. A combination of markers increased sensitivity but decreased the number of patients eligible for a certain test combination. Combining urine cytology with FGFR3 analysis without stratifying for FGFR3 status of the incident tumor increased sensitivity from 56% to 76%. Conclusions: A combination of markers increased the percentage of patients eligible for urine based followup and the sensitivity of recurrence detection. Adding FGFR3 analysis to urine cytology could be valuable for noninvasive followup of patients with nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据