Reflex UroVysion Testing in Suspicious Urine Cytology Cases

被引:36
作者
Ferra, Susana [1 ]
Denley, Ryan [1 ]
Herr, Harry [2 ]
Dalbagni, Guido [2 ]
Jhanwar, Suresh [1 ]
Lin, Oscar [1 ]
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Pathol, New York, NY 10065 USA
[2] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Surg, Urol Serv, New York, NY 10065 USA
关键词
urothelial carcinoma; UroVysion; suspicious; cytology; IN-SITU HYBRIDIZATION; BLADDER-CANCER; MOLECULAR-GENETICS; UROTHELIAL CARCINOMA; FLOW-CYTOMETRY; BTA STAT; MULTITARGET; DELETION; SURVEILLANCE; TELOMERASE;
D O I
10.1002/cncy.20016
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: UroVysion is a US Food and Drug Administration-approved fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) probe set for use in the detection of recurrent urothelial carcinoma and in patients with hematuria. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the usefulness of UroVysion as a reflex test in patients with a suspicious urine cytology diagnosis. The rationale was that a more aggressive workup might be indicated in patients with a suspicious cytology diagnosis and positive UroVysion test, METHODS: The study population included 161 urine specimens diagnosed as suspicious over a period of 12 months. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (NPV) were calculated based on the histologic and cystoscopic correlation. RESULTS: The results using the reporting criteria suggested by the manufacturer demonstrated a sensitivity of 68.3%, a specificity of 39.7%, a PPV of 56.8%, and a NPV of 51.9%. The results using the presence of any cytogenetic abnormality as a positive FISH test demonstrated a sensitivity of 82.9%, a specificity of 21.7%, a PPV of 54.8%, and an NPV of 51.7%. CONCLUSIONS: A negative UroVysion test did not rule out the presence of low-grade or high-grade Urothelial carcinoma in urine specimens diagnosed as suspicious. The use of less strict criteria dramatically increased the sensitivity of UroVysion FISH; however, there was a marked decrease in specificity noted, The results in this current study appear to indicate that a more aggressive workup of patients with a suspicious cytology, positive UroVysion result, and negative cystoscopic evaluation is not currently justified. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2009;117:7-14. (C) 2009 American Cancer Society.
引用
收藏
页码:7 / 14
页数:8
相关论文
共 34 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2008, Cancer Facts Figures 2008
  • [2] Balazs M, 1997, GENE CHROMOSOME CANC, V19, P84, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2264(199706)19:2<84::AID-GCC3>3.0.CO
  • [3] 2-W
  • [4] BILLEREY C, 1993, WORLD J UROL, V11, P156
  • [5] Bubendorf L, 2001, AM J CLIN PATHOL, V116, P79
  • [6] CAIRNS P, 1993, ONCOGENE, V8, P1083
  • [7] Comparison of multitarget fluorescence in situ hybridization in urine with other noninvasive tests for detecting bladder cancer
    Friedrich, MG
    Toma, MI
    Hellstern, A
    Pantel, K
    Weisenberger, DJ
    Noldus, J
    Huland, H
    [J]. BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2003, 92 (09) : 911 - 914
  • [8] Grossman HB, 2006, UROLOGY, V67, P33
  • [9] A comparison of BTA stat, hemoglobin dipstick, telomerase and vysis urovysion assays for the detection of urothelial carcinoma in urine
    Halling, KC
    King, W
    Sokolova, IA
    Karnes, RJ
    Meyer, RG
    Powell, EL
    Sebo, TJ
    Cheville, JC
    Clayton, AC
    Krajnik, KL
    Ebert, TA
    Nelson, RE
    Burkhardt, HM
    Ramakumar, S
    Stewart, CS
    Pankratz, VS
    Lieber, MM
    Blute, ML
    Zincke, H
    Seelig, SA
    Jenkins, RB
    O'Kane, DJ
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2002, 167 (05) : 2001 - 2006
  • [10] A comparison of cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization for the detection of urothelial carcinoma
    Halling, KC
    King, W
    Sokolova, IA
    Meyer, RG
    Burkhardt, HM
    Halling, AC
    Cheville, JC
    Sebo, TJ
    Ramakumar, S
    Stewart, CS
    Pankratz, S
    O'Kane, DJ
    Seelig, SA
    Lieber, MM
    Jenkins, RB
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2000, 164 (05) : 1768 - 1775