Skip to main content
Log in

Uringebundene Diagnostik

Ein Update der Kieler Tumorbank

Urine-based diagnostics

An update on the Kiel Tumor Bank

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Urologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Die Heterogenität von Blasenkarzinomen bei Invasion und Metastasierung und deren häufigen Rezidive stellen eine Herausforderung für den Arzt dar, der Blasenkarzinompatienten behandelt, und für den Forscher, der die Diagnose, die Rezidive und das Behandlungsumfeld von Blasenkarzinomen untersucht. In der Mehrzahl neuer Blasenkarzinomfälle beginnen die Untersuchungen, wenn der Patient Symptome zeigt (z. B. Hämaturie oder Blasenentleerungsstörungen). Dieser Modus der Entdeckung ist bei 15–30% der neu entdeckten Fälle inadäquat, weil die Patienten zum Zeitpunkt der Diagnose bereits einen invasiven Tumor haben.

Bei Blasenkarzinompatienten ist eine 3- bis 6-monatige Nachsorge unumgänglich, da Blasentumoren häufig rezidivieren. Zum Nachweis eines Blasentumors ist eine Zystoskopie erforderlich, die invasiv und relativ teuer ist. Die Spontanurinzytologie, der Goldstandard der nicht invasiven Marker, ist sehr tumorspezifisch und hat eine gute Sensitivität bei High-grade-Tumoren. Die Sensitivität für Low-grade-Tumoren ist dagegen gering. Die Genauigkeit der Zytologie hängt von der Erfahrung des Untersuchers ab und ist nicht überall verfügbar. Uringebundene Marker können zwar überall eingesetzt werden, aber ihr Nutzen muss noch weiter diskutiert werden.

Abstract

The heterogeneity of bladder tumors in their ability to invade and metastasize and their frequent recurrence pose a challenge for physicians who treat bladder cancer patients and for the researchers who work on bladder cancer diagnosis, recurrence, and treatment-related areas. For most new bladder cancer cases, investigation begins when patients are symptomatic (i.e., hematuria or irritative voiding). This mode of detection is often inadequate for nearly 15–30% of these new cases with high-grade bladder cancer, since the tumor is already in the invasive stage at the time of diagnosis.

Bladder cancer patients are on a mandatory 3-month to 6-month surveillance schedule because bladder tumors frequently recur. The current mode of detecting bladder cancer involves cystoscopy, which is an invasive and relatively expensive procedure. Voided urine cytology, the standard noninvasive marker, is highly tumor specific and has good sensitivity for detecting high-grade tumors. However, its sensitivity for detecting low-grade tumors is low; its accuracy depends on the examiner’s expertise; and it is not available everywhere. Marker systems are readily available for use in practice. Their utility remains under discussion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Literatur

  1. Amling CL (2000) Diagnosis and management of superficial bladder cancer. Curr Probl Cancer 25:219–278

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bastacky S, Ibrahim S, Wilczynski SP, Murphy WM (1999) The accuracy of urinary cytology in daily practice. Cancer 87:118–128

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Botteman MF, Pashos CL, Redaelli A et al (2003) The health economics of bladder cancer: a comprehensive review of the published literature. Pharmacoeconomics 21:1315–1330

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Datta SN, Allen GM, Evans R et al (2002) Urinary tract ultrasonography in the evaluation of haematuria – a report over 1.000 cases. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 84:203–205

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Droller MJ (2001) Cancer heterogencity and its biologic implications in the grading of urothelial carcinoma. J Urol 165:696–697

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hautmann SH, Toma M, Lorenzo Gomez MF et al (2004) Immunocyt an the HA-HAase urine tests for the detection of bladder cancer: a side by side comparison. Eur Urol 46:466–471

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hautmann S, Eggers J, Meyhoff H et al (2007) Tumor markers for bladder cancer: Up to date study by the Kiel tumor bank. Urologe 46(11):1508–1513

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kotake T, Saiki S, Kinouchi T et al (1990) Detection of the c-myc gene product in urinary bladder cancer. Jpn J Cancer Res 81:1198–1201

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lee R, Droller MJ (2000) The natural history of bladder cancer. Implications for therapy. Urol Clin North Am 27:1–13

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Liu BC, Loughlin KR (2000) Telomerase in human bladder cancer. Urol Clin North Am 27:115–123

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lokeshwar VB, Habuchi T, Grossman HB et al (2006) Cytology and tumor markers: Markers beyond cytology. In: Soloway MS (ed) Bladder Tumors, 21 edn. Health publications limited, Paris France, pp 65–138

  12. Lotan Y, Roehrborn CG (2003) Sensitivity and specificity of commonly available tumor markers versus cytology: results of a comprehensive literature review and meta-analyses. J Urol 61:109–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Mahnert B, Tauber S, Kriegmair M et al (1999) BTA-TRAK – a useful diagnostic tool in urinary bladder cancer? Anticancer Res 19:2615–2619

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Malkowicz SB (2000) The application of human complement factor H-related protein (BTA-TRAK) in monitoring patients with bladder cancer. Urol Clin North Am 27:63–73 ix

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Mattioli S, Seregni E, Caperna L et al (2000) BTA-TRAK combined with urinary cytology is a reliable urinary indicator of recurrent transitinonal cell carcinoma (TCC) of the bladder. Int J Biol Markers 15:219–225

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Ponsky LE, Sharma S, Pandrangi L et al (2001) Screening and monitoring for bladder cancer: refining the use of NMP22. J Urol 166:75–78

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. van Rhijn BW, Lurkin I, Kirkels WJ et al (2001) Microsatellite analysis – DNA test in urine competes with cystoskopy in follow-up of superficial bladder carcinoma: a phase II trial. Cancer 92:768–775

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ries LAG, Eisner MP, Kosary CL et al (eds) SEER Cancer Statistics Review. 1975–2001. Natl Canc Inst Bethesda, Maryland

  19. Schultz IJ, Kiemeney LA, Karthaus HF et al (2004) Survivin mRNA copy number in bladder washings predicts tumor recurrence in patients with superficial urothelial cell carcinomas. Clin Chem 50:1425–1428

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. van der Poel HG, Debruyne FM (2001) Can biological markers replace cystoscopy?. An update. Curr Opin Urol 11:503–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Veeramachaneni R, Nordberg ML, Shi R et al (2003) Evaluation of flourescence in situ hybridization as an ancillary tool to urine cytology in diagnosing urothelial carcinoma. Diagn Cytopathol 28:301–307

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Hautmann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hautmann, S., Lokeshwar, V. & Juenemann, K. Uringebundene Diagnostik. Urologe 48, 619–624 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-009-1991-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-009-1991-7

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation