Purpose: Both BTA TRAK and NMP22 urine concentrations have shown a sensitivity superior to urine cytology in the detection of bladder cancer. We compared these tumor markers with urine cytology performed on 3 consecutive samples and evaluated by an expert cytopathologist. Patients and Methods: The investigations were conducted on 94 patients undergoing a diagnostic cystoscopy for a high suspicion of bladder cancer (group 1) and on 102 patients with previous history of transitional cell carcinoma awaiting a follow-up cystoscopy (group 2). Biopsy specimens were obtained also from tumor negative patients. Immunoassays for BTA TRAK and NMP22 were carried out according to standard methods. The choice of the cut-off was based on the ground of sensitivity and specificity curves intersection. Urine cytology results were expressed as positive, negative and ‘dubious’. Results: Overall sensitivity was 56% for NMP22 (cut-off 11 U/ml) and 57% for BTA TRAK (cut-off 60 U/ml). When dubious results were considered as positive cases, urine cytology achieved a sensitivity of 73.3%. Assuming dubious cases as negative results, urine cytology sensitivity resulted 59.3%. When the 2 groups of patients were evaluated separately with different cut-off, there was no significant gain in sensitivity for BTA TRAK and NMP22 over urine cytology. Conclusions: Urine cytology performed on 3 samples showed the highest sensitivity and specificity. The diagnostic advantage of urine cytology over BTA TRAK and NMP22 was maintained when patients were stratified by tumor grade.

Keywords:
BTA TRAK, NMP22, Urine cytology, Transitional cell carcinoma, Bladder
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2000 S. Karger AG, Basel
2000
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
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.
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 government 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.
You do not currently have access to this content.