Tumour Markers in Bladder Cancer

European Oncology Review, 2005:1-7 DOI: http://doi.org/10.17925/EOH.2005.0.0.1t
Citation European Oncology Review, 2005:1-7 DOI: http://doi.org/10.17925/EOH.2005.0.0.1t

Bladder cancer is the fourth most common type of cancer among men and the eighth most common among women. Each year more than 50,000 and 24,000 new bladder cancers are diagnosed in the US and in Germany, respectively.1,2 Patients with bladder cancer are treated for painless microhaematuria or gross haematuria in the absence of urinary tract infection (UTI) and/or irritative voiding symptoms.
The gold standard for detecting bladder cancer is cystoscopy. Cystoscopy is a reliable investigation that identifies nearly all papillary and sessile lesions. It is an invasive procedure causing some discomfort for patients. At initial diagnosis, 65% to 70% of bladder cancers are confined to the urothelium (Ta, Tis) or invade the lamina propria (T1) and can be managed with endoscopic resection and intravesical therapy. Thirty per cent to 35% of newly diagnosed bladder cancers have invaded the detrusor muscle (T2–T4).3–5 Ta, grade 1 and grade 2 tumours recur in 30% to 70% and progress to muscle-invasive disease in less than 7% of patients. In contrast, high-grade stage T1 tumours have a progression rate of 30% to 50%.3–5 The high recurrence rate and the risk of progression necessitate follow-up care after treatment for bladder cancer at regular intervals. Follow-up protocols include cystoscopy every three months for one to two years, every six months for an additional two to three years and then annually.
To improve early detection of bladder cancer, as well as to monitor treatment response and tumour recurrence, bladder tumour markers are critical. An ideal bladder cancer test would be non-invasive, highly sensitive and specific, inexpensive, easy to perform and yield highly reproducible results.6 The validity of a tumour marker test can be expressed as sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV). Sensitivity and specificity are terms in statistics for the probability of the identification of those with or without the condition (bladder cancer). PPV and NPV are terms for the probability of the usefulness of a test in identifying true positives or true negatives. Definitions of these are shown in Figure 1. An accurate tumour marker also would have the potential to replace or delay cystoscopy in the follow-up of bladder cancer patients. If the test for a bladder cancer marker accomplished these criteria, this would improve the quality of life of patients and decrease the cost of surveillance by substituting a less expensive test for a more expensive procedure.7
  1. Boring C C, Squires T S, Tong T, Montgomery S, “Cancer statistics”, CA Cancer J. Clin. (1994); 44: pp. 7–26.
  2. Arbeitsgemeinschaft Bevölkerungsbezogener, “Krebsregister in Deutschland (Hrsg)”, Krebs in Deutschland 4, überarbeitete, aktualisierte ausgabe, Saarbrücken (2004).
  3. Sebe P, Lebret T, Molinie V, Herve J M, Yonneau L, Lugagne P M, Saporta F, Orsoni J L, Butreau M, Botto H, “Superficial grade G2 tumours of the bladder: recurrence, progression, prognosis”, Prog. Urol. (2003), 13: pp. 608–612
  4. Fitzpatrick J M, West A B, Butler M R, Lane V, O’Flynn J D, “Superficial bladder tumours (stages pTa, grades 1 and 2): the importance of recurrent pattern following initial resection”, J. Urol. (1986); 135: pp. 920–922.
  5. Heney N M, Ahmed S, Flanagan M J, Frable W, Corder M P, Hafermann M D, Hawkins I R, “Superficial bladder cancer: progression and recurrence”, J. Urol. (1983); 130: pp. 1,083–1,086.
  6. Simon M A, Lokeshwar V B, Soloway M S, “Current bladder cancer tests: unnecessary or beneficial?”, Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. (2003); 47: pp. 91–107.
  7. Lokeshwar V B, Soloway M S, “Current bladder tumor tests: does their projected utility fulfill clinical necessity?”, J. Urol. (2001); 165: pp. 1,067–1,077.
  8. Lotan Y, Roehrborn C G, “Cost-effectiveness of a modified care protocol substituting bladder tumor markers for cystoscopy for the followup of patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: a decision analytical approach”, J. Urol. (2002); 167: pp. 75–79.
  9. Konety B R, Getzenberg R H, “Urine based markers of urological malignancy”, J. Urol. (2001); 165: pp. 600–611.
  10. Fradet Y, Islam M, Boucher L, Parent-Vaugeois C, Tardif M, “Polymorphic expression of a human superficial bladder tumor antigen defined by mouse monoclonal antibodies”, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. (1987); 84: pp. 7,272–7,231.
  11. Fradet Y, LaRue H, Parent-Vaugeois C, Bergeron A, Dufour C, Boucher L, Bernier L, “Monoclonal antibody against a tumor-associated sialoglycoprotein of superficial papillary bladder tumours and cervical condylomas”, Int. J. Cancer (1990); 46: pp. 990–997.
  12. Toma M I, Friedrich M G, Hautmann S H, Jakel K T, Erbersdobler A, Hellstern A, Huland H, “Comparison of the ImmunoCyt test and urinary cytology with other urine tests in the detection and surveillance of bladder cancer”, World J. Urol. (2004); 22: pp.145–149.
  13. Pfister C, Chautard D, Devonec M, Perrin P, Chopin D, Rischmann P, Bouchot O, Beurton D, Coulange C, Rambeaud J J, “Immunocyt test improves the diagnostic accuracy of urinary cytology: results of a French multicenter study”, J Urol. (2003); 169: pp. 921–924.
  14. Drapier E, Renaudin K, Maillet F, Braud G, Laboisse C, Bouchot O, “Value of the uCyt+ test for the detection and followup of bladder tumours”, Prog. Urol. (2003); 13: pp. 222–226.
  15. Feil G, Zumbrägel A, Päulgen-Nelde H J, Hennenlotter J, Maurer S, Krause S, Bichler K H, Stenzl A, “Accuracy of the ImmunoCyt assay in the diagnosis of transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder”, Anticancer Res. (2003); 23(2A): pp. 963–967.
  16. Lodde M, Mian C, Wiener H, Haitel A, Pycha A, Marberger M, “Detection of upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma with ImmunoCyt: a preliminary report”, Urology (2001); 58: pp. 362–366.
  17. Vriesema J L, Atsma F, Kiemeney L A, Peelen W P, Witjes J A, Schalken J A, “Diagnostic efficacy of the ImmunoCyt test to detect superficial bladder cancer recurrence”, Urology (2001); 58: pp. 367–371.
  18. Olsson H, Zackrisson B, “ImmunoCyt a useful method in the follow-up protocol for patients with urinary bladder carcinoma”, Scand. J. Urol. Nephrol. (2001); 35: pp. 280–282.
  19. Mian C, Pycha A, Wiener H, Haitel A, Lodde M, Marberger M, “Immunocyt: a new tool for detecting transitional cell cancer of the urinary tract”, J. Urol. (1999); 161: pp. 1,486–1,489.
  20. Fradet Y, Campbell L, Emond J P et al., “Performance characteristics of a new monoclonal antibody test for bladder cancer: ImmunoCyt™”, Cand. J. Urol. (1997); 4: pp. 400–405.
  21. Kinders R, Jones T, Root R, Bruce C, Murchison H, Corey M, Williams L, Enfield D, Hass G M, “Complement factor H or a related protein is a marker for transitional cell cancer of the bladder”, Clin. Cancer Res. (1998); 4: pp. 2,511–2,520.
  22. Corey M J, Kinders R J, Poduje C M, Bruce C L, Rowley H, Brown L G, Hass G M, Vessella R L, “Mechanistic studies on the effect of anti-factor H antibodies on complement-mediated lysis”, J. Biol. Chem. (2000); 275: pp. 12,917–12,925.
  23. Austyn J M, Wood K J, Principles of cellular and molecular immunology, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1993), pp. 522–554.
  24. Fernandez Gomez J M, Garcia Rodriguez J, Escaf Barmadah S et al., “Urinary BTA-TRAK in the follow-up of superficial transitional-cell bladder carcinoma”, Arch. Esp. Urol. (2002); 55: pp.41–49.
  25. Priolo G, Gontero P, Martinasso G et al., “Bladder tumor antigen assay as compared to voided urine cytology in the diagnosis of bladder cancer”, Clin. Chim. Acta. (2001); 305: pp. 47–53.
  26. 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”, Eur. Urol. (2000); 38: pp. 419–425.
  27. Heicappell R, Wettig I C, Schostak M, Müller M, Steiner U, Sauter T, Miller K, “Quantitative detection of human complement factor H-related protein in transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder”, Eur. Urol. (1999); 35: pp. 81–87.
  28. Mahnert B, Tauber S, Kriegmair M et al., “BTA-TRAK – a useful diagnostic tool in urinary bladder cancer?” Anticancer Res. (1999); 19: pp. 2,615–2,619.
  29. Thomas L, Leyh H, Marberger M et al., “Multicenter trial of the quantitative BTA TRAK assay in the detection of bladder cancer”, Clin. Chem. (1999); 45: pp. 472–477.
  30. Abbate L, D’Introno A, Cardo G et al., “Comparison of nuclear matrix protein 22 and bladder tumor antigen in urine of patients with bladder cancer”, Anticancer Res. (1998); 18: pp. 3,803–3,805.
  31. Ellis W J, Blumenstein B A, Ishak L M, Enfield D L, “Clinical evaluation of the BTA TRAK assay and comparison to voided urine cytology and the Bard BTA test in patients with recurrent bladder tumours. The Multi Center Study Group”, Urology (1997); 50: pp. 882–887.
  32. Giannopoulos A, Manousakas T, Gounari A et al., “Comparative evaluation of the diagnostic performance of the BTA stat test, NMP 22 and urinary bladder cancer antigen for primary and recurrent bladder tumours”, J. Urol. (2001); 2: pp. 470–475.
  33. Heicappell R, Muller M, Fimmers R, Miller K, “Qualitative determination of urinary human complement factor H-related protein (hcfHrp) in patients with bladder cancer, healthy controls, and patients with benign urologic disease”, Urol. Int. (2000); 65: pp. 181–184.
  34. Nasuti J F, Gomella L G, Ismial M, Bibbo M, “Utility of the BTA stat test kit for bladder cancer screening”, Diagn. Cytopathol. (1999); 21: pp. 27–29.
  35. Ramakumar S, Bhuiyan J, Besse J A, Roberts S G, Wollan P C, Blute M L, O’Kane D J, “Comparison of screening methods in the detection of bladder cancer”, J. Urol. (1999); 161: pp. 388–394.
  36. Sharma S, Zippe C D, Pandrangi L, Nelson D, Agarwal A, “Exclusion criteria enhance the specificity and positive predictive value of NMP22 and BTA stat”, J. Urol. (1999); 162: pp. 53–57.
  37. Leyh H, Marberger M, Conort P et al., “Comparison of the BTA stat test with voided urine cytology and bladder wash cytology in the diagnosis and monitoring of bladder cancer”, Eur. Urol. (1999);35: pp. 52–56.
  38. Sözen S, Biri H, Sinik Z, Küpeli B, Alkibay T, Bozkirli I, “Comparison of the nuclear matrix protein 22 with voided urine cytology and BTA stat test in the diagnosis of transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder”, Eur. Urol. (1999); 36: pp. 225–229.
  39. Pode D, Shapiro A, Wald M, Nativ O, Laufer M, Kaver I, “Noninvasive detection of bladder cancer with the BTA stat test”, J. Urol. (1999); 161: pp. 443–446.
  40. Wiener H G, Mian C, Haitel A, Pycha A, Schatzl G, Marberger M, “Can urine bound diagnostic tests replace cystoscopy in the management of bladder cancer?”, J. Urol. (1998); 159: pp. 1,876–1,880.
  41. Sarosdy M F, Hudson M A et al., “Improved detection of recurrent bladder cancer using the Bard BTA stat Test”, Urology (1997); 50: pp. 349–353.
  42. Lekili M, Sener E, Demir M A, Temeltas G, Muezzinoglu T, Buykusu C, “Comparison of the nuclear matrix protein 22 with voided urine cytology in the diagnosis of transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder”, Urol. Res. (2004); 32: pp. 124–128.
  43. Lahme S, Bichler K H, Feil G, Krause S, “Comparison of cytology and nuclear matrix protein 22 for the detection and follow-up of bladder cancer”, Urol. Int. (2001); 66: pp. 72–77.
  44. Giannopoulos A, Manousakas T, Gounari A, Constantinides C, Choremi-Papadopoulou H, Dimopoulos C, “Comparative evaluation of the diagnostic performance of the BTA stat test, NMP 22 and urinary bladder cancer antigen for primary and recur-rent bladder tumours”, J. Urol. (2001); 2: pp. 470–475.
  45. Ponsky L E, Sharma S, Pandrangi L, Kedia S, Nelson D, Agarwal A, Zippe C D, “Screening and monitoring for bladder cancer: refining the use of NMP22”, J. Urol. (2001); 1: pp. 75–78.
  46. Hughes J H, Katz R L, Rodriguez-Villanueva J, Kidd L, Dinney C, Grossman H B, Fritsche H A Jr, “Urinary nuclear matrix protein 22 (NMP22): a diagnostic adjunct to urine cytologic examination for the detection of recurrent transitionalcell carcinoma of the bladder”, Diagn. Cytopathol. (1999); 20: pp. 285–290.
  47. Stampfer D S, Carpinito G A, Rodriquez-Villanueva J et al., “Evaluation of NMP 22 in the detection of transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder”, J. Urol. (1998); 159: pp. 394–398.
  48. Witjes J A, van der Poel H G, van Balken M R, Debruyne F M, Schalken J A, “Urinary NMP22 and karyometry in the diagnosis and follow-up of patients with superficial bladder cancer”, Eur. Urol. (1998); 33 (4): pp. 387–391.
  49. Landman J, Chang Y, Kavaler E, Droller M J, Liu C S, “Sensitivity and specificity of NMP-22, telomerase, and BTA in the detection of human bladder cancer”, J. Urol. (1998); 52: pp. 398–402.
  50. Miyanaga N, Akaza H, Ishikawa S et al., “Clinical evaluation of nuclear matrix protein 22 (NMP22) in urine as a novel marker for urothelial cancer”, Eur. Urol. (1997); 31: pp. 163–168.
  51. Soloway M S, Briggman V, Carpinito G A et al., “Use of a new tumor marker, urinary NMP22, in the detection of occult or rapidly recurring transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary tract following surgical treatment”, J. Urol. (1996); 156: pp. 363–367.
  52. Yokoyama T, Sekigawa R, Hayashi T, “The clinical efficacy of BladderChek NMP22 in urothelial cancer”, Rinsho Byori (2004); 52: pp. 199–203.
  53. Oehr P, “Non-invasive screening of urinary bladder cancer. Is NMP22 BladderChek paving the avenue?”, (abstract) J. Urol. (2004); 171 Suppl: p. 70.
  54. Gutierrez C, Palou J, Bujons A et al., “The detection of nuclear matrix protein 22 in the follow up of patients after endovesical treatment with BCG”, (abstract) Eur. Urol. (2004); Suppl 3 (2): p. 97.
  55. Tomera K, Clark W R, Singsaas M W, Strawbridge L R, “Results of screening high risk patients for urothelial cancers with a new office test – NMP22 BladderChek”, (abstract) J. Urol. (2003); 169 Suppl: pp. 226–227.
  56. Skacel M, Fahmy M, Brainard J A et al., “Multitarget fluorescence in situ hybridization assay detects transitional cell carcinoma in the majority of patients with bladder cancer and atypical or negative urine cytology”, J. Urol. (2003); 169: pp. 2,101–2,105.
  57. Placer J, Espinet B, Salido M, Sole F, Gelabert-Mas A, “Clinical utility of multiprobe FISH assay in voided urine specimens for the detection of bladder cancer and its recurrences compared with urinary cytology”, Eur. Urol. (2002); 42 (6): pp. 547–552.
  58. Sarosdy M F, Schellhammer P, Bokinsky G et al., “Clinical evaluation of a multi-target fluorescent in situ hybridization assay for detection of bladder cancer”, J. Urol. (2002); 168: pp. 1,950–1,954.
  59. Halling K C, King W, Sokolova I A et al., “A comparison of cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization for the detection of urothelial carcinoma”, J. Urol. (2000); 164: pp. 1,768–1,775.
  60. Bubendorf L, Grilli B, Sauter G, Mihatsch M J, Gasser T C, Dalquen P, “Multiprobe FISH for enhanced detection of bladder cancer in voided urine specimens and bladder washings”, Am. J. Clin. Pathol. (2001); 116: pp. 79–86.