Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 87, No. 3, 2011
Issue release date: October 2011

Predicting the Risk of High-Grade Bladder Cancer Using Noninvasive Data

Shapur N. · Pode D. · Katz R. · Shapiro A. · Yutkin V. · Pizov G. · Appelbaum L. · Zorn K.C. · Duvdevani M. · Landau E.H. · Gofrit O.N.
To view the fulltext, log in and/or choose pay-per-view option

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password





Contact Information











I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in

Abstract

Aim: To examine the hypothesis that the risk of high-grade bladder cancer can be predicted using noninvasively obtained data. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the database of 431 patients that had transurethral resection of first-time bladder tumors between June 1998 and December 2009. Pre-operative parameters evaluated were: patients’ age; gender; sonographic tumor diameter, number and location of tumor inside the bladder; presence of hydronephrosis, and results of urinary cytology. Parameters that showed significance in multivariate analysis were incorporated into the nomogram. Results: Multivariate analysis of the data showed that patient’s age, the presence of hydronephrosis, sonographic tumor diameter (risk of a high-grade tumor: 14, 29, 43.3, 55.7 and 69.4% at diameters: 0.5–1.5, 1.6–2, 2.1–2.5, 2.6–3 and >3 cm, respectively), location of tumor in the bladder (risk of high-grade tumor: 28.8, 47, 67.5 and 90.5% in the lateral walls, posterior/base, anterior and dome, respectively), and urinary cytology were all highly significant and independent predictors of high-grade tumors. A nomogram constructed using these variables scored an area of 0.853 in the ROC curve. Conclusions: The risk of high-grade bladder tumor can be accurately predicted using non-invasively obtained information. This prediction can help to triage patients with newly detected bladder cancer for biopsy.



Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

References

  1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Thun M: Cancer Statistics 2009;59:225–249.
  2. Babjuk M, Oosterlinck W, Sylvester R, Kaasinen E, Bohle A, Redorta JP: EAU Guidelines on TaT1 (non-muscle invasive) bladder cancer. Acta Urol Esp 2009;33:361–371.
  3. Extermann M, Hurria A: Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:1824–1831.
  4. Linn JF, Sesterhenn I, Mostofi FK, Schoenberg M: The molecular characteristics of bladder cancer in young patients. J Urol 1998;159:1493–1496.
  5. Ries LA, Wingo PA, Miller DS, Howe HL, Weir HK, Rosenberg HM, Vernon SW, Cronin K, Edwards BK: The annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1973–1997, with a special section on colorectal cancer. Cancer 2000;88:2398–2424.
  6. Itzchak Y, Singer D, Fischelovitch Y: Ultrasonographic assessment of bladder tumors. 1. Tumor detection. J Urol 1981;126:31–33.
  7. Dibb MJ, Noble DJ, Peh WCG, Lam CHL, Yip KH, Li JHC, Tam PC: Ultrasonographic analysis of bladder tumours. Clin Imaging 2001;25:416–420.
  8. Ozden E, Turgut AT, Turkolmez K, Resorlu B, Safak M: Effect of bladder carcinoma location on detection rates by ultrasonography and computed tomography. Urology 2007;69:889–892.
  9. Divrik RT, Sahin A, Altok M, Unlu N, Zorlu F: The frequency of hydronephrosis at initial diagnosis and its effect on recurrence and progression in patients with superficial bladder cancer. J Urol 2007;178:802–806.
  10. Nguyen CT, Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW: Are nomograms needed in the management of bladder cancer? Urol Oncol 2010;28:102–107.
  11. Caruso G, Salvaggio G, Campisi A, Melloni D, Midiri M, Bertolotto M, Lagalla R: Bladder tumour staging: comparison of contrast-enhanced and gray-scale ultrasound. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:151–156.


Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 38.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 26.50