4.6 Article

Diagnostic and Prognostic Roles of Urine Nectin-2 and Nectin-4 in Human Bladder Cancer

期刊

CANCERS
卷 15, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cancers15092565

关键词

Nectin; NMP-22; cytology; bladder cancer; urine; serum; expression; biomarker; detection

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the potential diagnostic and prognostic values of urine Nectin-2 and Nectin-4 in bladder cancer (BCa). The results showed that urine Nectin-4 levels were significantly higher than Nectin-2 levels. Both Nectin-2 and Nectin-4 had higher sensitivity than cytology for diagnosing BCa.
The clinical utility of urine nectins in bladder cancer (BCa) is unclear. We investigated the potential diagnostic and prognostic values of urine Nectin-2 and Nectin-4. Levels of urine Nectin-2, Nectin-4, and NMP-22 were quantified using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in 122 patients with BCa, consisting of 78 with non-muscle-invasive BCa (NMIBC) and 44 with muscle-invasive BCa (MIBC), and ten healthy controls. Tumor nectin expression in MIBC was evaluated with immunohistochemical staining of transurethral resection specimens. The level of urine Nectin-4 (mean: 18.3 ng/mL) was much higher than that of urine Nectin-2 (mean: 0.40 ng/mL). The sensitivities of Nectin-2, Nectin-4, NMP-22, and cytology assays were 84%, 98%, 52%, and 47%, respectively; their specificities were 40%, 80%, 100%, and 100%, respectively. Both urine Nectin-2 and Nectin-4, though not NMP-22, were found to be significantly more sensitive than cytology. A four-titer grouping based on levels of urine Nectin-2/Nectin-4 (low/high, high/high, low/low, and high/low) showed a high capability for discriminating between NMIBC and MIBC. Neither urine Nectin-2 nor Nectin-4 levels had a significant prognostic value in NMIBC or MIBC. Urine levels correlated with tumor expression and serum levels in the Nectin-4 analysis, but not in the Nectin-2 analysis. Urine nectins are potential diagnostic biomarkers for BCa.

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