China Oncology ›› 2024, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (12): 1080-1089.doi: 10.19401/j.cnki.1007-3639.2024.12.002
• Article • Previous Articles Next Articles
WANG Zhiting1,2(), REN Min1,2, XUE Tian1,2, WANG Haochen1,2, CHANG Heng1,2, BAI Qianming1,2, ZHOU Xiaoyan1,2, ZHU Xiaoli1,2(
)
Received:
2024-08-28
Online:
2024-12-30
Published:
2025-01-21
Share article
WANG Zhiting, REN Min, XUE Tian, WANG Haochen, CHANG Heng, BAI Qianming, ZHOU Xiaoyan, ZHU Xiaoli. Comparison of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and urine cytology in diagnosing urothelial carcinoma: a single-center retrospective cohort study[J]. China Oncology, 2024, 34(12): 1080-1089.
Tab. 1
Diagnostic metrics of FISH, cytology, and combined testing for UC"
Item | TP | FP | TN | FN | Accuracy/% | χ2 value | Sensitivity/% | χ2 value | Specificity/% | χ2 value | PPV/% | NPV/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FISH | 98 | 20 | 127 | 38 | 79.51a | 7.00#1.04* | 72.06a | 8.03#7.11* | 86.39 | 0.15#13.07* | 83.05 | 76.97 |
Cytology | 80 | 23 | 124 | 56 | 72.08 | 7.00#5.03λ | 58.82 | 8.03#25.04λ | 84.35 | 0.15#10.08λ | 77.67 | 68.89 |
Combined | 107 | 35 | 112 | 29 | 77.39 | 1.04*5.03λ | 78.68b,c | 7.11*25.04λ | 76.19b,c | 13.07*10.08λ | 75.35 | 79.43 |
Tab. 3
Diagnostic metrics of FISH, cytology, and combined testing for various subtypes of UC"
Item | TP | FP | TN | FN | Accuracy/% | χ2 | Sensitivity/% | χ2 | Specificity/% | χ2 | PPV/% | NPV/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Invasive UC | ||||||||||||
FISH | 68 | 20 | 127 | 11 | 86.28a | 6.48#5.26* | 86.08a | 8.52#2.25* | 86.39 | 0.15#13.07* | 77.27 | 92.03 |
Cytology | 53 | 23 | 124 | 26 | 78.32 | 6.48#1.16λ | 67.09 | 8.52#17.05λ | 84.35 | 0.15#10.08λ | 69.74 | 82.67 |
Combined | 72 | 35 | 112 | 7 | 81.42 | 5.26*1.16λ | 91.14b | 2.25*17.05λ | 76.19b,c | 13.07*10.08λ | 67.29 | 94.12 |
Non-invasive UC | ||||||||||||
FISH | 30 | 20 | 127 | 27 | 76.96 | 0.63#4.05* | 52.63 | 0.31#3.20* | 86.39 | 0.15#13.07* | 60.00 | 82.47 |
Cytology | 27 | 23 | 124 | 30 | 74.02 | 0.63#0.45λ | 47.37 | 0.31#6.13λ | 84.35 | 0.15#10.08λ | 54.00 | 80.52 |
Combined | 35 | 35 | 112 | 22 | 72.06 | 4.05*0.45λ | 61.40b | 3.20*6.13λ | 76.19b,c | 13.07*10.08λ | 50.00 | 83.58 |
High-grade UC | ||||||||||||
FISH | 93 | 20 | 127 | 19 | 84.94a | 8.07#2.23* | 83.04 | 0.15#5.14* | 86.39 | 0.15#13.07* | 82.30 | 86.99 |
Cytology | 74 | 23 | 124 | 38 | 76.45 | 8.07#4.45λ | 66.07 | 0.15#24.04λ | 84.35 | 0.15#10.08λ | 76.29 | 76.54 |
Combined | 100 | 35 | 112 | 12 | 81.85 | 2.23*4.45λ | 89.29b | 5.14*24.04λ | 76.19b,c | 13.07*10.08λ | 74.07 | 90.32 |
Low-grade UC | ||||||||||||
FISH | 5 | 20 | 127 | 19 | 77.19 | 0.03#8.47* | 20.83 | 1.33#0.50* | 86.39 | 0.15#13.07* | 20.00 | 86.99 |
Cytology | 6 | 23 | 124 | 18 | 76.02 | 0.03#7.69λ | 25.00 | 1.33#0.00λ | 84.35 | 0.15#10.08λ | 20.69 | 87.32 |
Combined | 7 | 35 | 112 | 17 | 69.59b,c | 8.47*7.69λ | 29.17 | 0.50*0.00λ | 76.19b,c | 13.07*10.08λ | 16.67 | 86.82 |
Tab. 4
Comparison of AUC and NRI for FISH, cytology, and combined testing across different subtypes of UC"
AUC | P value | NRI | P value | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Invasive UC | ||||
FISH vs cytology | 0.808 vs 0.713 | 0.004 | 21.03% | 0.003 |
Combined vs FISH | 0.784 vs 0.808 | 0.144 | -5.14% | 0.639 |
Combined vs cytology | 0.784 vs 0.713 | 0.007 | 15.89% | 0.107 |
Non-invasive UC | ||||
FISH vs cytology | 0.695 vs 0.659 | 0.315 | 7.30% | 0.323 |
Combined vs FISH | 0.688 vs 0.695 | 0.752 | -1.43% | 0.888 |
Combined vs cytology | 0.688 vs 0.659 | 0.256 | 5.87% | 0.548 |
High-grade UC | ||||
FISH vs cytology | 0.847 vs 0.752 | 0.002 | 19.01% | 0.003 |
Combined vs FISH | 0.827 vs 0.847 | 0.245 | -3.95% | 0.668 |
Combined vs cytology | 0.827 vs 0.752 | 0.001 | 15.06% | 0.075 |
Low-grade UC | ||||
FISH vs cytology | 0.536 vs 0.547 | 0.794 | -2.13% | 0.794 |
Combined vs FISH | 0.527 vs 0.536 | 0.766 | -1.86% | 0.851 |
Combined vs cytology | 0.527 vs 0.547 | 0.399 | -3.99% | 0.712 |
[1] | BABJUK M, BURGER M, CAPOUN O, et al. European association of urology guidelines on non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (Ta, T1, and carcinoma in situ)[J]. Eur Urol, 2022, 81(1): 75-94. |
[2] | SUNG H, FERLAY J, SIEGEL R L, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2021, 71(3): 209-249. |
[3] |
ROUPRÊT M, BABJUK M, BURGER M, et al. European association of urology guidelines on upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: 2020 update[J]. Eur Urol, 2021, 79(1): 62-79.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.05.042 pmid: 32593530 |
[4] | 刘坤. 超声对膀胱肿瘤诊断价值的评估[D]. 大连: 大连医科大学, 2018. |
LIU K. Evaluation of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of bladder tumors[D]. Dalian Medical University, 2018. | |
[5] | KONG C F, ZHANG S H, LEI Q F, et al. State-of-the-art advances of nanomedicine for diagnosis and treatment of bladder cancer[J]. Biosensors, 2022, 12(10): 796. |
[6] | LIU C L, TSAI H W, PENG S L, et al. CDCP1 (CUB domain containing protein 1) is a potential urine-based biomarker in the diagnosis of low-grade urothelial carcinoma[J]. PLoS One, 2023, 18(3): e0281873. |
[7] | YANG T, LI Y, LI J, et al. Diagnostic value comparison of urothelium carcinoma among urine exfoliated cells fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) examination, computerized tomography (CT) scan, and urine cytologic examination[J]. Med Sci Monit, 2018, 24: 5788-5792. |
[8] |
PYCHA S, TRENTI E, MIAN C, et al. Diagnostic value of Xpert® BC Detection, Bladder Epicheck®, Urovysion® FISH and cytology in the detection of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma[J]. World J Urol, 2023, 41(5): 1323-1328.
doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04350-x pmid: 36929411 |
[9] |
ZHANG J J, ZHENG S, GAO Y N, et al. A partial allelotyping of urothelial carcinoma of bladder in the Chinese[J]. Carcinogenesis, 2004, 25(3): 343-347.
doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgh015 pmid: 14604888 |
[10] | SOKOLOVA I A, HALLING K C, JENKINS R B, et al. The development of a multitarget, multicolor fluorescence in situ hybridization assay for the detection of urothelial carcinoma in urine[J]. J Mol Diagn, 2000, 2(3): 116-123. |
[11] | TODENHÖFER T, HENNENLOTTER J, ESSER M, et al. Stepwise application of urine markers to detect tumor recurrence in patients undergoing surveillance for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer[J]. Dis Markers, 2014, 2014: 973406. |
[12] | GOMELLA L G, MANN M J, CLEARY R C, et al. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in the diagnosis of bladder and upper tract urothelial carcinoma: the largest single-institution experience to date[J]. Can J Urol, 2017, 24(1): 8620-8626. |
[13] |
LAVERY H J, ZAHARIEVA B, MCFADDIN A, et al. A prospective comparison of UroVysion FISH and urine cytology in bladder cancer detection[J]. BMC Cancer, 2017, 17(1): 247.
doi: 10.1186/s12885-017-3227-3 pmid: 28388880 |
[14] | AALAMI A H, AALAMI F. Diagnostic performance of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC): a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Int J Clin Oncol, 2022, 27(10): 1605-1615. |
[15] | JIN H Y, LIN T H, HAO J Q, et al. A comprehensive comparison of fluorescence in situ hybridization and cytology for the detection of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Medicine, 2018, 97(52): e13859. |
[16] | SCIARRA A, LASCIO G D, DEL GIUDICE F, et al. Comparison of the clinical usefulness of different urinary tests for the initial detection of bladder cancer: a systematic review[J]. Curr Urol, 2021, 15(1): 22-32. |
[17] |
SASSA N, IWATA H, KATO M, et al. Diagnostic utility of UroVysion combined with conventional urinary cytology for urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract[J]. Am J Clin Pathol, 2019, 151(5): 469-478.
doi: 10.1093/ajcp/aqy170 pmid: 30668617 |
[18] | NAGAI T, OKAMURA T, YANASE T, et al. Examination of diagnostic accuracy of UroVysion fluorescence in situ hybridization for bladder cancer in a single community of Japanese hospital patients[J]. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 2019, 20(4): 1271-1273. |
[19] |
TODENHÖFER T, HENNENLOTTER J, ESSER M, et al. Combined application of cytology and molecular urine markers to improve the detection of urothelial carcinoma[J]. Cancer Cytopathol, 2013, 121(5): 252-260.
doi: 10.1002/cncy.21247 pmid: 23172833 |
[20] |
KNOWLES M A, HURST C D. Molecular biology of bladder cancer: new insights into pathogenesis and clinical diversity[J]. Nat Rev Cancer, 2015, 15(1): 25-41.
doi: 10.1038/nrc3817 pmid: 25533674 |
[21] | SHANG D H, LIU Y T, XU X H, et al. Diagnostic value comparison of CellDetect, fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH), and cytology in urothelial carcinoma[J]. Cancer Cell Int, 2021, 21(1): 465. |
[22] |
COLLÀ RUVOLO C, WÜRNSCHIMMEL C, WENZEL M, et al. Comparison between 1973 and 2004/2016 World Health Organization grading in upper tract urothelial carcinoma treated with radical nephroureterectomy[J]. Int J Clin Oncol, 2021, 26(9): 1707-1713.
doi: 10.1007/s10147-021-01941-9 pmid: 34091795 |
[23] | STEWART B, WILD C. World cancer report 2014[M]. Lyon: IARC Press, 2014: 738-750. |
[24] | HALLING K C, KING W, SOKOLOVA I A, et al. A comparison of cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization for the detection of urothelial carcinoma[J]. J Urol, 2000, 164(5): 1768-1775. |
[25] |
MOONEN P M, MERKX G F, PEELEN P, et al. UroVysion compared with cytology and quantitative cytology in the surveillance of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer[J]. Eur Urol, 2007, 51(5): 1275-1280;discussion1280.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.10.044 pmid: 17084511 |
[26] |
NAGAI T, NAIKI T, ETANI T, et al. UroVysion fluorescence in situ hybridization in urothelial carcinoma: a narrative review and future perspectives[J]. Transl Androl Urol, 2021, 10(4): 1908-1917.
doi: 10.21037/tau-20-1207 pmid: 33968678 |
[27] | COMPÉRAT E, AMIN M B, BERNEY D M, et al. What’s new in WHO fifth edition-urinary tract[J]. Histopathology, 2022, 81(4): 439-446. |
[28] | SYDÉN F, BAARD J, BULTITUDE M, et al. Consultation on UTUC Ⅱ Stockholm 2022: diagnostics, prognostication, and follow-up-where are we today?[J]. World J Urol, 2023, 41(12): 3395-3403. |
[29] | SAROSDY M F, SCHELLHAMMER P, BOKINSKY G, et al. Clinical evaluation of a multi-target fluorescent in situ hybridization assay for detection of bladder cancer[J]. J Urol, 2002, 168(5): 1950-1954. |
[30] |
HALLING K C, KING W, SOKOLOVA I A, et al. A comparison of BTA stat, hemoglobin dipstick, telomerase and Vysis UroVysion assays for the detection of urothelial carcinoma in urine[J]. J Urol, 2002, 167(5): 2001-2006.
pmid: 11956427 |
[31] | SAVIC S, ZLOBEC I, THALMANN G N, 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-Guérin therapy[J]. Int J Cancer, 2009, 124(12): 2899-2904. |
[32] | 鲁颂献. 荧光原位杂交(FISH)技术在诊断尿路上皮癌中的研究[D]. 吉林大学, 2013. |
LU S X. Study on fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) technique in diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma[D]. Jilin University, 2013. | |
[33] | 熊钻, 梅玉峰, 王春阳, 等. 荧光原位杂交技术联合尿脱落细胞学、膀胱肿瘤抗原对尿路上皮细胞肿瘤的诊断效能分析[J]. 国际检验医学杂志, 2019, 40(10): 1201-1204. |
XIONG Z, MEI Y F, WANG C Y, et al. Performance analysis of fluorescence in situ hybridization combined with urinary exfoliative cytology and bladder tumor antigen in the diagnosis of urothelial cell carcinoma[J]. Int J Lab Med, 2019, 40(10): 1201-1204. | |
[34] | KE C J, HU Z Q, YANG C G. UroVysionTM fluorescence in situ hybridization in urological cancers: a narrative review and future perspectives[J]. Cancers, 2022, 14(21): 5423. |
[35] |
MOATAMED N A, APPLE S K, BENNETT C J, et al. Exclusion of the uniform tetraploid cells significantly improves specificity of the urine FISH assay[J]. Diagn Cytopathol, 2013, 41(3): 218-225.
doi: 10.1002/dc.21831 pmid: 21987521 |
[36] | DALQUEN P, KLEIBER B, GRILLI B, et al. DNA image cytometry and fluorescence in situ hybridization for noninvasive detection of urothelial tumors in voided urine[J]. Cancer, 2002, 96(6): 374-379. |
[37] |
TAPIA C, GLATZ K, OBERMANN E C, et al. Evaluation of chromosomal aberrations in patients with benign conditions and reactive changes in urinary cytology[J]. Cancer Cytopathol, 2011, 119(6): 404-410.
doi: 10.1002/cncy.20171 pmid: 21732550 |
[1] | WANG Shanshan, YE Dingwei, YANG Li, CHENG Fan, YANG Tiejun, ZHANG Xiaoping, YU Zhixian, ZHANG Qingyun, YANG Yong. Correlation of HER2 expression and clinicopathological characteristics in patients with urothelial carcinoma in China [J]. China Oncology, 2024, 34(11): 1011-1019. |
[2] | MIAO Changfeng,MA Yuntao,WANG Xiaopeng,HU Ming,YANG Xiaojun . Construction of the risk factor model of gastric cancer and its value in screening opportunity and options [J]. China Oncology, 2019, 29(7): 501-507. |
[3] | NIE Jun, ZHOU Bo, ZHANG Yulin. The expression and clinical significance of PANDAR in non-small cell lung cancer [J]. China Oncology, 2017, 27(7): 569-574. |
[4] | LI Jian, YE Ding-wei, YAO Xu-dong, ZHANG Shi-lin, DAI Bo, ZHANG Hai-liang, SHEN Yi-jun, ZHU Yao, SHI Guo-hai, ZHU Yi-ping, MA Chun-guang, QIN Xiaojian, LIN Guo-wen, XIAO Wen-jun. The value of preoperative platelet to lymphocyte ratio in predicting of clinical stage and prognosis in upper tract urothelial carcinoma [J]. China Oncology, 2013, 23(6): 457-461. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||
沪ICP备12009617
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd