Urine Biomarkers for the Diagnosis of Bladder Cancer: a Network Meta-Analysis
Urology Journal,
Vol. 18 No. 06 (2021),
18 January 2022
,
Page 623-632
https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v18i06.6254
Abstract
Purpose: To identify effective urine biomarkers for bladder cancer diagnosis.
Materials and Methods: This meta-analysis was conducted following the guidelines of the Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Relevant studies were searched from the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Heterogeneity tests were performed using Q statistics and I2 tests to determine the use of the random or fixed effects model. A direct comparison meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were conducted. The effect values are presented as odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Sensitivity analysis and consistency tests were performed.
Results: Fifty-eight studies with 12,038 participants were included. Direct comparison meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences in bladder cancer antigen (BTA) trak vs. nuclear matrix protein 22 (NMP22), BTA stat vs. urine cytology (UC), and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) vs. UC, among the sensitivity indicators. Among the specificity indicators, there were statistically significant differences in BTA trak vs. UC, ImmunoCyt (immunocyte) vs. NMP22, and BTA stat vs. FISH. Among the positive predictive indicators, NMP22 vs. UC, BTA stat vs. UC, and FISH vs. NMP22 showed statistically significant differences. Among the negative predictive indicators, the differences in FISH vs. UC, FISH vs. NMP22, and hyaluronidase 1 (HYAL-1) vs. UC were statistically significant. Among the accuracy indicators, FISH vs. NMP22, FISH vs. UC, and HYAL-1 vs. UC showed statistically significant differences. Network meta-analysis showed that HYAL-1, urothelial carcinoma associated 1 (UCA1) and survivin had the highest sensitivity, while UC had the lowest sensitivity. The specificity of UC, FISH, and HYAL-1 was the highest, while that of UCA1 was the lowest. In terms of positive predictive indicators, UC, FISH, and HYAL-1 had the highest positive predictive value, while the BTA group had the lowest positive predictive value. In terms of negative predictive indicators, HYAL-1, UCA1, and survivin had the highest negative predictive value, while UC had the lowest negative predictive value. In terms of accuracy indicators, HYAL-1, UCA1, and survivin had the highest accuracy, while UC had the lowest accuracy.
Conclusion: HYAL-1 and survivin are suitable urine biomarkers for bladder cancer diagnosis.
- bladder cancer
- urine biomarker
- fluorescence in situ hybridization
- immunocytology
- network meta-analysis
How to Cite
References
Kaufman DS, Shipley WU, Feldman AS. Bladder cancer. Lancet. 2009;374:239-49.
Holz S, Albisinni S, Gilsoul J, et al. Risk factor assessment in high-risk, bacillus Calmetteâ“Guérin-treated, non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Research & Reports in Urology. 2017;9:195-202.
Freedman ND, Silverman DT, Hollenbeck AR, Arthur S, Abnet CC. Association between smoking and risk of bladder cancer among men and women. Jama. 2011;306:737-45.
Bertz S, Hartmann A, Knüchel-Clarke R, Gaisa NT. [Specific types of bladder cancer]. Der Pathologe. 2016;37:40.
Cheung G, Sahai A, Billia M, Dasgupta P, Khan MS. Recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of bladder cancer. BMC Medicine,11,1(2013-01-17). 2013;11:13-.
Cohen SM, Johansson SL. Epidemiology and etiology of bladder cancer. Urologic Clinics of North America. 2015;13:291-8.
Mcguire S. World Cancer Report 2014. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer, WHO Press, 2015. Advances in Nutrition. 2016;7:418.
Xylinas E, Kluth LA, Rieken M, Karakiewicz PI, Lotan Y, Shariat SF. Urine markers for detection and surveillance of bladder cancer. Urol Oncol. 2014;32:222-9.
Swellam M, Sadek M, Ahmady O, Khalifa A. Comparative Evaluation of the Nuclear Matrix Protein, Fibronectin, Urinary Bladder Cancer Antigen and Voided Urine Cytology in the Detection of Bladder Tumors - The Journal of Urology. Journal of Urology. 2002;168:465-9.
Giannopoulos A, Manousakas T, Gounari A, Constantinides C, Choremi-Papadopoulou H, Dimopoulos C. Comparative evaluation of the diagnostic performance of the BTA stat test, NMP22 and urinary bladder cancer antigen for primary and recurrent bladder tumors. Journal of Urology. 2001;166:470-5.
Reynolds JP, Voss JS, Kipp BR, et al. Comparison of urine cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization in upper urothelial tract samples. Cancer Cytopathology. 2014;122:459-67.
Chou R, Gore JL, Buckley D, et al. Urinary Biomarkers for Diagnosis of Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2015;163:922.
Aiye G, Xiuhua W, Lan G, Juan S, Changyi S, Zhen W. Bladder tumour antigen (BTA stat) test compared to the urine cytology in the diagnosis of bladder cancer: A meta-analysis. Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada. 2014;8:347-52.
Whiting PF, Rutjes AWS, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2011;155:529-36.
Polanin JR, Hennessy EA, Tanner-Smith EE. A Review of Meta-Analysis Packages in R. Journal of Educational & Behavioral Statistics. 2016;42.
Zhang XH, Xiao C. Diagnostic Value of Nineteen Different Imaging Methods for Patients with Breast Cancer: a Network Meta-Analysis. Cellular Physiology & Biochemistry. 2018;46:2041-55.
Chao Z, Geng PL, Yi G, Zeng XT. Application of netmeta Package in R Language to Implement Network Meta-Analysis. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine. 2014;14:625-30.
Higgins JP, Jackson D, Barrett JK, Lu G, Ades AE, White IR. Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies. Research Synthesis Methods. 2012;3:98–110.
Rücker G, Schwarzer G. Ranking treatments in frequentist network meta-analysis works without resampling methods. BMC Medical Research Methodology,15,1(2015-07-31). 2015;15:58.
Badawy T, El-Abd S, Zahra M, Eid M, Abdou S, El-Shazly S. Quantitative measurement of telomerase reverse transcriptase mRNA and chromosomal analysis of urine by M-FISH in the diagnosis and follow-up of bladder cancer. Molecular Medicine Reports. 2008;1:325-33.
Melih B, Altug T, Ozer G, et al. Use of the nuclear matrix protein 22 Bladder Chek test? in the diagnosis of residual urothelial cancer before a second transurethral resection of bladder cancer. International Urology & Nephrology. 2015;47:473-7.
Boman HS, Hedelin HS, Holmäng S. Four bladder tumor markers have a disappointingly low sensitivity for small size and low grade recurrence.: J. Urol 2002;167:80–83. J Urol. 2002;21:163-4.
Bubendorf L, ., Grilli B, ., Sauter G, ., Mihatsch MJ, Gasser TC, Dalquen P, . Multiprobe FISH for enhanced detection of bladder cancer in voided urine specimens and bladder washings. American Journal of Clinical Pathology. 2001;116:79-86.
Chen A, Fu G, Xu Z, et al. Detection of Bladder Cancer Via Microfluidic Immunoassay and Single-Cell DNA Copy Number Alteration Analysis of Captured Urinary Exfoliated Tumor Cells. Cancer Research. 2018;78:4073-85.
Sun Y, He DL, Ma Q, et al. Comparison of seven screening methods in the diagnosis of bladder cancer. Chinese Medical Journal. 2006;119:1763-71.
Doğan C, Pelit ES, Yıldırım A, et al. The value of the NMP22 test for superficial bladder cancer diagnosis and follow-up. Turkish Journal of Urology. 2013;39:137.
Friedrich MG, Hellstern A, Hautmann SH, et al. Clinical use of Urinary Markers For The Detection And Prognosis Of Bladder Carcinoma: A Comparison Of Immunocytology With Monoclonal Antibodies Against Lewis X And 486p3/12 With The BTA STAT And NMP22 Tests. J Urol. 2002;168:470-4.
Giannopoulos A, ., Manousakas T, ., Mitropoulos D, ., et al. Comparative evaluation of the BTAstat test, NMP22, and voided urine cytology in the detection of primary and recurrent bladder tumors. Urology. 2000;55:871-5.
Ba?Os JL, Gutiérrez, Rodrigo MH, Rebollo, Juárez FM, Antolín, García B, Martín. NMP 22, BTA stat test and cytology in the diagnosis of bladder cancer: a comparative study. Urologia Internationalis. 2001;66:185-90.
Halling KC, King W, ., Sokolova IA, et al. A comparison of cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization for the detection of urothelial carcinoma. Journal of Urology. 2000;164:1768-75.
Marcus H, Oliver P, J?Rg H, Erika S, Gerhard F, Arnulf S. Combinations of urine-based tumour markers in bladder cancer surveillance. Scandinavian Journal of Urology & Nephrology. 2009;43:461-6.
Huang JW, Mu JG, Li YW, et al. The utility of fluorescence in situ hybridization for diagnosis and surveillance of bladder urothelial carcinoma. Urology Journal. 2014;11:1974-9.
Gawad IA, Abd El, Moussa HS, Nasr MI, et al. Comparative study of NMP-22, telomerase, and BTA in the detection of bladder cancer. Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute. 2005;17:193.
Ishiwata S, Takahashi S, Homma Y, et al. Noninvasive detection and prediction of bladder cancer by fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis of exfoliated urothelial cells in voided urine ☆. Urology. 2001;57:811-5.
Jalil H, Ali Reza G, Mohammad Mohsen M, et al. Detection of recurrent bladder cancer: NMP22 test or urine cytology? Urology Journal. 2012;9:367-72.
Kojima T, Nishiyama H, Ozono S, et al. Clinical evaluation of two consecutive UroVysion fluorescence in situ hybridization tests to detect intravesical recurrence of bladder cancer: a prospective blinded comparative study in Japan. International Journal of Clinical Oncology. 20181-8.
Laudadio J, Keane TEReeves HM, Savage SJ, Hoda RS, Lage JM, Wolff DJ. Fluorescence in situ hybridization for detecting transitional cell carcinoma: implications for clinical practice. Urologic Oncology Seminars & Original Investigations. 2005;24:270-1.
Lavery HJ, Zaharieva B, Mcfaddin A, Heerema N, Pohar KS. A prospective comparison of UroVysion FISH and urine cytology in bladder cancer detection. Bmc Cancer. 2017;17:247.
Leyh H, Marberger M, ., Conort P, ., Sternberg C, ., Pansadoro V, ., Pagano F, ., et al. Comparison of the BTA stat test with voided urine cytology and bladder wash cytology in the diagnosis and monitoring of bladder cancer. European Urology. 1999;35:52-6.
Hong-Xia L, Ming-Rong W, Huan Z, Jian C, Chang-Ling L, Qin-Jing P. Comparison of fluorescence in situ hybridization, NMP22 bladderchek, and urinary liquid-based cytology in the detection of bladder urothelial carcinoma. Diagnostic Cytopathology. 2013;41:852-7.
March-Villalba JA, Panach-Navarrete J, Herrero-Cervera MJ, Aliño-Pellicer S, Martínez-Jabaloyas JM. hTERT mRNA expression in urine as a useful diagnostic tool in bladder cancer. Comparison with cytology and NMP22 BladderCheck Test®. Actas Urologicas Espanolas. 2018;42:524-30.
Mercedes MA, Lourdes M, María José R, et al. Utility of a multiprobe fluorescence in situ hybridization assay in the detection of superficial urothelial bladder cancer. Cancer Genetics & Cytogenetics. 2007;173:131-5.
May M, Hakenberg OW, Gunia S, et al. Comparative Diagnostic Value of Urine Cytology, UBC-ELISA, and Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization for Detection of Transitional Cell Carcinoma of Urinary Bladder in Routine Clinical Practice. Urology. 2007;70:449-53.
Meiers I, Singh H, Hossain D, et al. Improved filter method for urine sediment detection of urothelial carcinoma by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine. 2007;131:1574.
Moonen PMJ, Merkx GFM, Peelen P, Karthaus HFM, Smeets DFCM, Witjes JA. UroVysion Compared with Cytology and Quantitative Cytology in the Surveillance of Non–Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer. European Urology. 2007;51:1275-80.
O'Sullivan P, Sharples K, Dalphin M, et al. A Multigene Urine Test for the Detection and Stratification of Bladder Cancer in Patients Presenting with Hematuria. Journal of Urology. 2012;188:741-7.
Pesch B, Taeger D, Johnen G, et al. Screening for bladder cancer with urinary tumor markers in chemical workers with exposure to aromatic amines. International Archives of Occupational & Environmental Health. 2014;87:715-24.
Placera J, Salido M, Solé F, Gelabert-Mas A. Clinical Utility of a Multiprobe FISH Assay in Voided Urine Specimens for the Detection of Bladder Cancer and its Recurrences, Compared with Urinary Cytology. European Urology. 2002;42:547-52.
PODE, SHAPIRO, WALD, NATIV, LAUFER. Noninvasive detection of bladder cancer with the BTA stat test. Commentary. Journal of Urology. 1999;161:443-6.
Raitanen MP, Marttila T, ., Nurmi M, ., et al. Human complement factor H related protein test for monitoring bladder cancer. Journal of Urology. 2001;165:374-7.
Ramakumar S, Bhuiyan J, Besse JA, et al. COMPARISON OF SCREENING METHODS IN THE DETECTION OF BLADDER CANCER. Journal of Urology. 1999;161:388-94.
Rhijn BW, Van, Lurkin I, ., Kirkels WJ, Kwast TH, Van Der, Zwarthoff EC. Microsatellite analysis--DNA test in urine competes with cystoscopy in follow-up of superficial bladder carcinoma: a phase II trial. Cancer. 2015;92:768-75.
Saad A, Hanbury DCMcNicholas TA, Boustead GB, Morgan S, Woodman AC. A study comparing various noninvasive methods of detecting bladder cancer in urine. Bju International. 2015;89:369-73.
Sarosdy MF SP, Bokinsky G, Kahn P, Chao R, Yore L, et al. Clinical Evaluation of a Multi-target Fluorescent in Situ Hybridization Assay for Detection of Bladder Cancer. Journal of Urology. 2002;168:1950-4.
Serretta V, ., Pomara G, ., Rizzo I, ., Esposito E, . Urinary BTA-stat, BTA-trak and NMP22 in surveillance after TUR of recurrent superficial transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. European Urology. 2000;38:419-25.
Sharma S, ., Zippe CD, Pandrangi L, ., Nelson D, ., Agarwal A, . Exclusion criteria enhance the specificity and positive predictive value of NMP22 and BTA stat. J Urol. 2013;162:53-7.
Ruchi S, Vinod Kumar A, Seema A, Arati B, Navjeevan S, Vivek A. Cytokeratin-20 immunocytochemistry in voided urine cytology and its comparison with nuclear matrix protein-22 and urine cytology in the detection of urothelial carcinoma. Diagnostic Cytopathology. 2012;40:755-9.
Sullivan PS, Farzad N, Hope S, et al. Comparison of ImmunoCyt, UroVysion, and urine cytology in detection of recurrent urothelial carcinoma: a "split-sample" study. Cancer Cytopathology. 2010;117:167-73.
Toma MI, Friedrich MG, Hautmann SH, et al. Comparison of the ImmunoCyt test and urinary cytology with other urine tests in the detection and surveillance of bladder cancer. World Journal of Urology. 2004;22:145-9.
Tsui KH CS, Wang TM, Juang HH, Chen CL, Sun GH, et al. Comparisons of voided urine cytology, nuclear matrix protein-22 and bladder tumor associated antigen tests for bladder cancer of geriatric male patients in Taiwan, China. Asian J Androl 2007;9:711-5.
V P UW, R DV, al e. A comparison of urinary nuclear matrix protein-22 and bladder tumour antigen tests with voided urinary cytology in detecting and following bladder cancer: the prognostic value of false-positive results. BJU International. 2001;88:692-701.
Varella-Garcia M, Akduman B, Sunpaweravong P, Maria MVD, Crawford ED. The UroVysion fluorescence in situ hybridization assay is an effective tool for monitoring recurrence of bladder cancer. Urol Oncol. 2004;22:16-9.
Ravindra V, Nordberg ML, Runhua S, Herrera GA, Turbat-Herrera EA. Evaluation of fluorescence in situ hybridization as an ancillary tool to urine cytology in diagnosing urothelial carcinoma. Diagnostic Cytopathology. 2010;28:301-7.
Wiener HG, Mian C, ., Haitel A, ., Pycha A, ., Schatzl G, ., Marberger M, . Can urine bound diagnostic tests replace cystoscopy in the management of bladder cancer? Journal of Urology. 1998;159:1876-80.
Yafi FA, Brimo F, Steinberg J, Aprikian AG, Tanguay S, Kassouf W. Prospective analysis of sensitivity and specificity of urinary cytology and other urinary biomarkers for bladder cancer. Urologic Oncology. 2015;33:66.e25-66.e31.
- Abstract Viewed: 224 times
- 6254/pdf Downloaded: 158 times