Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
World Journal of Urology
Published in: World Journal of Urology 9/2015

01-09-2015 | Original Article

Multicenter evaluation of the role of UroVysion FISH assay in surveillance of patients with bladder cancer: does FISH positivity anticipate recurrence?

Authors: Casey Seideman, Daniel Canter, Philip Kim, Billy Cordon, Alon Weizer, Irma Oliva, Jianyu Rao, Brant A. Inman, Michael Posch, Harry Herr, Yair Lotan

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 9/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The significance of a positive UroVysion FISH assay is uncertain in patients with normal cystoscopy. This multicenter study evaluates the clinical significance of a positive FISH assay in patients with no visible tumor and excluding those with a positive cytology.

Methods

A multi-institutional, retrospective study of patients with a history of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder identified 664 patients with a FISH assay after excluding those with cystoscopic evidence of a tumor and/or positive cytology. Our primary end point was cancer recurrence, defined by biopsy. Progression was defined as recurrence with a tumor stage ≥T2. Statistical analyses were performed using Fisher’s exact test as a one-tailed test and Chi-square test with significance at 0.05, using SPSS® version 19.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).

Results

Of the 664 patients in this study, tumor stage was Ta (363, 55 %), T1 (183, 28 %), and CIS (109, 16 %) and most were high grade (440 pts, 66 %). The median follow-up was 26 months (3–104 months), and 277 (41.7 %) patients were recurred. In patients who were FISH positive, mean time to recurrence was 12.6 months, compared to 17.9 months if FISH negative (p = 0.03). In univariate analysis, atypical cytology, positive FISH, cystoscopic findings (atypical vs. normal), and previous intravesical therapy were associated with recurrence (p < 0.05). On multivariate analysis, pathologic stage, cystoscopic findings, and cytology were independently associated with recurrence (p < 0.05). Progression to ≥T2 disease occurred in 34 (5.1 %) patients in this cohort. On multivariate analysis, only initial T stage and FISH result were found to be independent predictors of progression (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Patients with a positive FISH and atypical cytology are more likely to recur even in the absence of visible tumor. FISH positivity may portend a higher risk for progression. These findings require prospective validation.
Literature
1.
Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A (2012) Cancer statistics for Hispanics/Latinos, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 62(5):283–298CrossRefPubMed
2.
Schneeweiss S, Kriegmair M, Stepp H (1999) Is everything all right if nothing seems wrong? a simple method of assessing the diagnostic value of endoscopic procedures when a gold standard is absent. J Urol 161(4):1116–1119CrossRefPubMed
3.
Svatek RS, Lee D, Lotan Y (2005) Correlation of office-based cystoscopy and cytology with histologic diagnosis: how good is the reference standard? Urology 66(1):65–68CrossRefPubMed
4.
Raitanen MP, Aine R, Rintala E et al (2002) Differences between local and review urinary cytology in diagnosis of bladder cancer. An interobserver multicenter analysis. Eur Urol 41(3):284–289CrossRefPubMed
5.
Halling KC, King W, Sokolova IA et al (2000) A comparison of cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization for the detection of urothelial carcinoma. J Urol 164(5):1768–1775CrossRefPubMed
6.
Lokeshwar VB, Habuchi T, Grossman HB et al (2005) Bladder tumor markers beyond cytology: international consensus panel on bladder tumor markers. Urology 66(6 Suppl 1):35–63CrossRefPubMed
7.
Babjuk M, Oosterlinck W, Sylvester R, Kaasinen E, Bohle A, Palou-Redorta J (2008) EAU guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol 54(2):303–314CrossRefPubMed
8.
Hajdinjak T (2008) UroVysion FISH test for detecting urothelial cancers: meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy and comparison with urinary cytology testing. Urol Oncol 26(6):646–651CrossRefPubMed
9.
Lotan Y, Roehrborn CG (2003) Sensitivity and specificity of commonly available bladder tumor markers versus cytology: results of a comprehensive literature review and meta-analyses. Urology 61(1):109–118 discussion 118CrossRefPubMed
10.
Sarosdy MF, Schellhammer P, Bokinsky G et al (2002) Clinical evaluation of a multi-target fluorescent in situ hybridization assay for detection of bladder cancer. J Urol 168(5):1950–1954CrossRefPubMed
11.
Yoder BJ, Skacel M, Hedgepeth R et al (2007) Reflex UroVysion testing of bladder cancer surveillance patients with equivocal or negative urine cytology: a prospective study with focus on the natural history of anticipatory positive findings. Am J Clin Pathol 127(2):295–301CrossRefPubMed
12.
Scher H, Bahnson R, Cohen S et al (1998) NCCN urothelial cancer practice guidelines. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Oncology (Williston Park) 12(7A):225–271
13.
Schlomer BJ, Ho R, Sagalowsky A, Ashfaq R, Lotan Y (2010) Prospective validation of the clinical usefulness of reflex fluorescence in situ hybridization assay in patients with atypical cytology for the detection of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. J Urol 183(1):62–67CrossRefPubMed
14.
Lotan Y, Bensalah K, Ruddell T, Shariat SF, Sagalowsky AI, Ashfaq R (2008) Prospective evaluation of the clinical usefulness of reflex fluorescence in situ hybridization assay in patients with atypical cytology for the detection of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. J Urol 179(6):2164–2169CrossRefPubMed
15.
Burger M, Grossman HB, Droller M et al (2013) Photodynamic diagnosis of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer with hexaminolevulinate cystoscopy: a meta-analysis of detection and recurrence based on raw data. Eur Urol 64(5):846–854CrossRefPubMed
16.
Herr HW, Donat SM (2011) Reduced bladder tumour recurrence rate associated with narrow-band imaging surveillance cystoscopy. BJU Int 107(3):396–398CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Multicenter evaluation of the role of UroVysion FISH assay in surveillance of patients with bladder cancer: does FISH positivity anticipate recurrence?
Authors
Casey Seideman
Daniel Canter
Philip Kim
Billy Cordon
Alon Weizer
Irma Oliva
Jianyu Rao
Brant A. Inman
Michael Posch
Harry Herr
Yair Lotan
Publication date
01-09-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
World Journal of Urology / Issue 9/2015
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-014-1452-9

Other articles of this Issue 9/2015

World Journal of Urology 9/2015 Go to the issue

Topic Paper

Outcome measures for stress urinary incontinence treatment: Can we minimally agree?

Topic Paper

Classification of stress urinary incontinence

Original Article

Surveillance for patients with clinical stage I nonseminomatous testicular germ cell tumors

Original Article

Urgent percutaneous nephrolithotomy for acute kidney injury secondary to bilateral stones: Is it safe and effective in infants?

Editorial

Functional urology 2015

Original Article

Postoperative complications and short-term oncological outcomes of patients aged ≥80 years undergoing robot-assisted radical cystectomy