Is conventional urinary cytology still reliable for diagnosis of primary bladder carcinoma? Accuracy based on data linkage of a consecutive clinical series and cancer registry

Acta Cytologica

Volumn 55, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 193-196

  Turco, Patricia ^a   Houssami, Nehmat ^b   Bulgaresi, Paolo ^a   Troni, Grazia Maria ^a   Galanti, Laura ^a   Cariaggi, Maria Paola ^a   Cifarelli, Paola ^a   Crocetti, Emanuele ^a   Ciatto, Stefano ^a  

^a Istituto Scientifico per Lo Studio e la Prevenzione Oncologica   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Accuracy; Bladder carcinoma; Urine cytology

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BLADDER CARCINOMA; CANCER GRADING; CANCER REGISTRY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; URINE CYTOLOGY; BLADDER TUMOR; CYTODIAGNOSIS; CYTOLOGY; INFORMATION PROCESSING; METHODOLOGY; REGISTER; REPRODUCIBILITY; STATISTICS; URINE;

CYTODIAGNOSIS; DATA COLLECTION; HUMANS; REGISTRIES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; URINARY BLADDER NEOPLASMS; URINE;

EID: 79955657660     PISSN: 00015547     EISSN: 19382650     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000320861     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Curling M, Broome G, Hendry WF: How accurate is urine cytology? J Royal Soc Med 1986; 79: 336-338.
2. Bastacky S, Ibrahim S, Wilczynski SP, Murphy WM: The accuracy of urinary cytology in daily practice. Cancer Cytopathol 1999; 87: 118-128.
3. Brown FM: Urine cytology: it is still the gold standard for screening? Urol Clin North Am 2000; 27: 25-37.
4. Bassi P, De Marco V, De Lisa A, Mancini M, Pinto F, Bertoloni R, Longo F: Non-invasive diagnostic tests for bladder cancer: a review of the literature. Urol Int 2005; 75: 193-200.
5. Lokeshwar VB, Soloway MS: Current bladder tumor tests: does their projected utility fulfill clinical necessity? J Urol 2001; 165: 1067-1077.
6. Raitanen MP, Aine R, Rintala E, Kallio J, Rajala P, Juusela H, Tammela TL; Finn Bladder Group: Differences between local and review urinary cytology in diagnosis of bladder cancer. An interobserver multicenter analysis. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2002; 36: 213-217.
7. Rathert P: Urinary cytology in cases of bladder cancer: a critical evaluation (in German). Urologe A 2003; 42: 908-911.
8. Messing EM, Teot L, Korman H, Underhill E, Barker E, Stork B, Qian J, Bostwick DG: Performance of urine test in patients monitored for recurrence of bladder cancer: a multicenter study in the United States. J Urol 2005; 174: 1238-1241.
9. Whisnant RE, Bastacky SI, Ohori NP: Cytologic diagnosis of low-grade papillary urothelial neoplasms (low malignant potential and low-grade carcinoma) in the context of the 1998 WHO/ISUP classification. Diagn Cytopathol 2003; 28: 186-190.
10. Curry JL, Wojcik EM: The effect of the current World Health Organization/International Society of Urologic Pathologists bladder neoplasm classification system on urine cytology results. Cancer Cytopathol. 2002; 96: 140-145.
11. Deshpande V, McKee GT: Analysis of atypical urine cytology in a tertiary care center. Cancer Cytopathol 2005; 105: 468-475.
12. Paci E, Crocetti E, Benvenuti A, Buzzoni C, Caldarella A, Giovannetti L, Giusti F, Intrieri T, Manneschi G, Miccinesi G, Sacchettini C: Cancer incidence in Italy, Florence and Prato (1998-2002); in Curado MP, Edwards B, Shin HR, Storm H, Ferlay J, Heanue M, Boyle P (eds): Cancer Incidence in Five Continents. Lyon, IARC Scientific Publications, vol 9 (160), 2007.
13. Montironi R, Lopez-Beltran A: The 2004 WHO classification of bladder tumors: a summary and commentary. Int J Surg Path 2005; 13: 143-153.
14. Cecchini S, Iossa A, Bonardi R, Ciatto S, Cariaggi P: Comparing two modalities of management of women with cytologic evidence of squamous or glandular atypia: early repeat cytology or colposcopy. Tumori 1997; 83: 732-734.