Urine Cytology Findings of Polyomavirus Infections

  • Harsharan K. Singh
  • Lukas Bubendorf
  • Michael J. Mihatsch
  • Cinthia B. Drachenberg
  • Volker Nickeleit
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 577)


Polyomaviruses of the BK- and JC-strains often remain latent within the transitional cell layer of the bladder, ureters and the renal pelvis as well as in tubular epithelial cells of the kidney. Slight changes in the immune status and/or an immunocompromised condition can lead to the (re) activation of latent polyomaviruses, especially along the transitional cell layer, resulting in the shedding of viral particles and infected cells into the urine. A morphologic sign of the (re) activation of polyomaviruses is the detection of typical intranuclear viral inclusion bearing epithelial cells, so-called “decoy cells”, in the urine. Decoy cells often contain polyoma-BK-viruses. The inclusion bearing cells are easily identified and quantifiable in routine Papanicolaou stained urine cytology specimens. With some experience, decoy cells can also be detected in the unstained urinary sediment by phase contrast microscopy. Different morphologic variants of decoy cells (types 1 through 4) are described and ancillary techniques (immunohistochemistry, electron microscopy (EM), and fluorescence-in-situ-hybridization (FISH)) for proper identification and characterization are discussed. Special emphasis is placed on the clinical significance of the detection of decoy cells as a parameter to assess the risk for disease, i.e., polyoma-BK-virus nephropathy (BKN) in kidney transplant recipients. The sensitivity and specificity of decoy cells for diagnosing BKN is 99% and 95%, respectively, the positive predictive value varies between 27% and more than 90%, and the negative predictive value is 99%. The detection of decoy cells is compared to other techniques applicable to assess the activation of polyomaviruses in the urine (polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and EM).


Renal Allograft Kidney Transplant Recipient Urine Cytology Renal Tubular Epithelial Cell Human Polyomavirus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Nickeleit V, Singh HK, Gilliland MGF et al. Latent polyomavirus type BK loads in native kidneys analyzed by Taqman PCR: What can be learned to better understand BK virus nephropathy? J Am Soc Nephrol 2003; 14:42–4A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chesters PM, Heritage J, McCance DJ. Persistence of DNA sequences of BK virus and JC virus in normal human tissues and in diseased tissues. J Infect Dis 1983; 147(4):676–684.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heritage J, Chesters PM, McCance DJ. The persistence papovavirus BK DNA sequences in normal human renal tissue. J Med Virol 1981; 8:143–150.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gardner SD, Field AM, Coleman DV et al. New human papovavirus (B.K.) isolated from urine after renal transplantation. Lancet 1971; 1:1253–1257.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Itoh S, Irie K, Nakamura Y et al. Cytologic and genetic study of polyomavirus-infected or polyomavirus-activated cells in human urine. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1998; 122(4):333–337.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kahan AV, Coleman DV, Koss LG. Activation of human polyomavirus infection-detection by cytologic technics. Am J Clin Pathol 1980; 74(3):326–332.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nickeleit V, Hirsch HH, Zeiler M et al. BK-virus nephropathy in renal transplants-tubular necrosis, MHC-class II expression and rejection in a puzzling game. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2000; 15(3):324–332.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Binet I, Nickeleit V, Hirsch HH et al. Polyomavirus disease under new immunosuppressive drugs: A cause of renal graft dysfunction and graft loss. Transplantation 1999; 67(6):918–922.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nickeleit V, Hirsch HH, Binet IF et al. Polyomavirus infection of renal allograft recipients: From latent infection to manifest disease. J Am Soc Nephrol 1999; 10(5):1080–1089.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nickeleit V, Singh HK, Mihatsch MJ. Polyomavirus nephropathy: Morphology, pathophysiology, and clinical management. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 2003; 12:599–605.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Drachenberg CB, Beskow CO, Cangro CB et al. Human polyoma virus in renal allograft biopsies: Morphological findings and correlation with urine cytology. Hum Pathol 1999; 30(8):970–977.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hogan TF, Padgett BL, Walker DL et al. Survey of human polyomavirus (JCV, BKV) infections in 139 patients with lung cancer, breast cancer, melanoma, or lymphoma. Prog Clin Biol Res 1983; 105:311–324.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Haririan A, Hamze O, Drachenberg CB et al. Polyomavirus reactivation in native kidneys of pan creas alone allograft recipients. Transplantation 2003; 75(8):1186–1190.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Masuda K, Akutagawa K, Yutani C et al. Persistent infection with human polyomavirus revealed by urinary cytology in a patient with heart transplantation, a case report. Acta Cytol 1998; 42(3):803–806.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Koss LG. The urinary tract in the absence of cancer. In: Koss LG, ed. Diagnostic Cytology and Its Histopathologic Basis. 4th ed. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott 1992; 2:890–933.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Crabbe JG. “Comet” or “decoy” cells found in urinary sediment smears. Acta Cytol 1971; 15(3):303–305.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    De Las Casas LE, Hoerl HD, Bardales RH et al. Utility of urinary cytology for diagnosing human polyoma virus infection in transplant recipients: A study of 37 cases with electron microscopic analysis. Diagn Cytopathol 2001; 25(6):376–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Asim M, Chong-Lopez A, Nickeleit V. Adenovirus infection of a renal allograft. Am J Kidney Dis 2003; 41(3):696–701.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nickeleit V, Steiger J, Mihatsch MJ. BK virus infection after kidney transplantation. Graft 2002; 5 (December Suppl):S46–S57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nickeleit V, Bubendorf L, Zeiler M et al. Polyomavirus-infected decoy cells in urine cytology specimens of renal allograft recipients: Clinicopathological considerations. Lab Invest 2002; 82(1):82A.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dalquen P, Kleiber B, Grilli B et al. DNA image cytometry and fluorescence in situ hybridization for noninvasive detection of urothelial tumors in voided urine. Cancer 2002; 96(6):374–379.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bardales RH. Constituents of urinary tract specimens in the absence of disease. In: Bardales RH, ed. Practical Urologic Cytopathology. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002:38–52.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fogazzi GB, Cantu M, Saglimbeni L. ‘Decoy cells’ in the urine due to polyomavirus BK infection: Easily seen by phase-contrast microscopy. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2001; 16(7):1496–1498.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Drachenberg RC, Drachenberg CB, Papadimitriou JC et al. Morphological spectrum of polyoma virus disease in renal allografts: Diagnostic accuracy of urine cytology. Am J Transplant 2001; 1(4):373–381.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Randhawa PS, Finkelstein S, Scantlebury V et al. Human polyoma virus-associated interstitial nephritis in the allograft kidney. Transplantation 1999; 67(1):103–109.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Drachenberg CB, Papadimitriou JC, Wali R et al. Improved outcome of polyoma virus allograft nephropathy with early biopsy. Transplant Proc 2004; 36(3):758–759.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Buehrig CK, Lager DJ, Stegall MD et al. Influence of surveillance renal allograft biopsy on diagnosis and prognosis of polyomavirus-associated nephropathy. Kidney Int 2003; 64(2):665–673.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mayr M, Nickeleit V, Hirsch HH et al. Polyomavirus BK nephropathy in a kidney transplant recipient: Critical issues of diagnosis and management. Am J Kidney Dis 2001; 38(3):E13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nickeleit V, Klimkait T, Binet IF et al. Testing for polyomavirus type BK DNA in plasma to identify renal-allograft recipients with viral nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2000; 342(18):1309–1315.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nickeleit V, Steiger J, Mihatsch MJ. Re: Noninvasive diagnosis of BK virus nephritis by measurement of messenger RNA for BK virus VP1. Transplantation 2003; 75(12):2160–2161.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hirsch HH, Knowles W, Dickenmann M et al. Prospective study of polyomavirus type BK replication and nephropathy in renal-transplant recipients. N Engl J Med 2002; 347(7):488–496.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Randhawa P, Ho A, Shapiro R et al. Correlates of quantitative measurement of BK polyomavirus (BKV) DNA with clinical course of BKV infection in renal transplant patients. J Clin Microbiol 2004; 42(3):1176–1180.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Limaye AP, Jerome KR, Kuhr CS et al. Quantitation of BK virus load in serum for the diagnosis of BK virus-associated nephropathy in renal transplant recipients. J Infect Dis 2001; 183(11):1669–1672.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Howell DN, Smith SR, Butterly DW et al. Diagnosis and management of BK polyomavirus interstitial nephritis in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 1999; 68(9):1279–1288.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ding R, Medeiros M, Dadhania D et al. Noninvasive diagnosis of BK virus nephritis by measurement of messenger RNA for BK virus VP1 in urine. Transplantation 2002; 74(7):987–994.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Biel SS, Nitsche A, Kurth A et al. Detection of human polyomaviruses in urine from bone marrow transplant patients: Comparison of electron microscopy with PCR. Clin Chem 2004; 50(2):306–312.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© and Springer Science+Business Media 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harsharan K. Singh
    • 1
  • Lukas Bubendorf
    • 2
  • Michael J. Mihatsch
    • 3
  • Cinthia B. Drachenberg
    • 4
  • Volker Nickeleit
    • 1
  1. 1.University North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  2. 2.Institute of PathologyUniversity Hospital of BaselBaselSwitzerland
  3. 3.University Hospital of BaselBaselSwitzerland
  4. 4.University of Maryland School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations