荧光原位杂交与尿脱落细胞学在尿路上皮癌诊断中的效能比较：一项单中心回顾性队列研究

王志婷, 任敏, 薛田, 王皓晨, 常恒, 柏乾明, 周晓燕, 朱晓丽

Comparison of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and urine cytology in diagnosing urothelial carcinoma: a single-center retrospective cohort study

WANG Zhiting, REN Min, XUE Tian, WANG Haochen, CHANG Heng, BAI Qianming, ZHOU Xiaoyan, ZHU Xiaoli

表4 不同亚型尿路上皮癌FISH、脱落细胞学和联合检测的AUC和NRI的比较

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