4.6 Article

Impact of clinical factors, including a point-of-care nuclear matrix protein-22 assay and cytology, on bladder cancer detection

期刊

BJU INTERNATIONAL
卷 103, 期 10, 页码 1368-1374

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08360.x

关键词

bladder cancer; detection; cytology; NMP22; tumour marker

资金

  1. University of Montreal Urology Associates
  2. Fonds de la Recherche en SantE du QuEbec
  3. University of Montreal Department of Surgery
  4. University of Montreal Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To determine whether the nuclear matrix protein-22 (NMP22) assay can improve the accuracy of discriminating between high-risk patients with and without bladder cancer. Age, gender, race, smoking status, haematuria and its extent, and the NMP22 and urinary cytology results, were available for 1272 patients. The data of 670 (52.7%) from four study sites were used to develop a logistic regression model-based nomogram to predict the presence of bladder cancer. The remaining data from 602 (47.3%) patients from nine study sites were used to externally validate the nomogram. A separate nomogram was developed for urinary cytology, and for the combination of NMP22 and urinary cytology findings. Of 1272 patients, 76 (6.0%) had bladder cancer, 217 (17.1%) were NMP22-positive and 17 (1.3%) had malignant cells on urinary cytology. NMP22 and urinary cytology results were independent predictors of bladder cancer (P = 0.005 and 0.007, respectively). In external validation, the area under the curve (AUC) for NMP22 was 76.0% vs 56.2% for cytology. External validation of the multivariable NMP22-based bladder cancer nomogram gave an AUC of 82.4% vs 74.7% for the multivariable cytology-based nomogram (gain 7.7%; P = 0.006) vs 82.6% for the multivariable nomogram combining NMP22 and cytology results (gain 0.2%; P = 0.1). The ability of the NMP22 test to predict bladder cancer in high-risk patients significantly exceeds that of urinary cytology. The NMP22-based nomogram can help to identify individuals at risk of 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