Optimization of nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer recurrence detection using a urine based FGFR3 mutation assay

Journal of Urology

Volumn 186, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 707-712

  Zuiverloon, Tahlita C M ^a   Tjin, Stephen S ^a   Busstra, Martijn ^a   Bangma, Chris H ^a   Boevé, Egbert R ^b   Zwarthoff, Ellen C ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b SINT FRANCISCUS GASTHUIS   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

biological; mutation; tumor markers; urinary bladder; urinary bladder neoplasms; urine

Indexed keywords

FIBROBLAST GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 3;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLADDER CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RECURRENCE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CYSTOSCOPY; FEMALE; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC ANALYSIS; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MALE; POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; URINALYSIS;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DNA MUTATIONAL ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MUTATION; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; RECEPTOR, FIBROBLAST GROWTH FACTOR, TYPE 3; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; URINARY BLADDER NEOPLASMS;

EID: 79960187684     PISSN: 00225347     EISSN: 15273792     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.03.141     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. S. Holmang, H. Hedelin, and C. Anderstrom The relationship among multiple recurrences, progression and prognosis of patients with stages Ta and T1 transitional cell cancer of the bladder followed for at least 20 years J Urol 153 1995 1823
2. H. Hedelin, S. Holmang, and L. Wiman The cost of bladder tumour treatment and follow-up Scand J Urol Nephrol 36 2002 344
3. M.F. Botteman, C.L. Pashos, and A. Redaelli The health economics of bladder cancer: a comprehensive review of the published literature Pharmacoeconomics 21 2003 1315
4. M.N. van derAa, E.W. Steyerberg, and E.F. Sen Patients' perceived burden of cystoscopic and urinary surveillance of bladder cancer: a randomized comparison BJU Int 101 2008 1106
5. B.L. Jacobs, C.T. Lee, and J.E. Montie Bladder cancer in 2010: how far have we come? CA Cancer J Clin 60 2010 244
6. M.N. van derAa, E.C. Zwarthoff, and E.W. Steyerberg Microsatellite analysis of voided-urine samples for surveillance of low-grade non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma: feasibility and clinical utility in a prospective multicenter study (Cost-Effectiveness of Follow-up of Urinary Bladder Cancer Trial [CEFUB]) Eur Urol 55 2009 659
7. C. Billerey, D. Chopin, and M.H. Aubriot-Lorton Frequent FGFR3 mutations in papillary non-invasive bladder (pTa) tumors Am J Pathol 158 2001 1955
8. D. Cappellen, C. De Oliveira, and D. Ricol Frequent activating mutations of FGFR3 in human bladder and cervix carcinomas Nat Genet 23 1999 18
9. B.W. van Rhijn, I. Lurkin, and F. Radvanyi The fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) mutation is a strong indicator of superficial bladder cancer with low recurrence rate Cancer Res 61 2001 1265
10. L.C. Kompier, M.N. van derAa, and I. Lurkin The development of multiple bladder tumour recurrences in relation to the FGFR3 mutation status of the primary tumour J Pathol 218 2009 104
11. M. Burger, J. Catto, and J. van Oers Mutation of the FGFR3 oncogene is an independent and favorable prognostic factor for tumor-specific survival in patients with urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract Verh Dtsch Ges Pathol 90 2006 244
12. S. Hernandez, E. Lopez-Knowles, and J. Lloreta Prospective study of FGFR3 mutations as a prognostic factor in nonmuscle invasive urothelial bladder carcinomas J Clin Oncol 24 2006 3664
13. J.M. van Oers, E.C. Zwarthoff, and I. Rehman FGFR3 mutations indicate better survival in invasive upper urinary tract and bladder tumours Eur Urol 55 2009 650
14. B.W. van Rhijn, A.N. Vis, and T.H. van derKwast Molecular grading of urothelial cell carcinoma with fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 and MIB-1 is superior to pathologic grade for the prediction of clinical outcome J Clin Oncol 21 2003 1912
15. T.C. Zuiverloon, C.S. Abas, and K.A. van der Keur In-depth investigation of the molecular pathogenesis of bladder cancer in a unique 26-year old patient with extensive multifocal disease: a case report BMC Urol 10 2010 5
16. T.C. Zuiverloon, M.N. van derAa, and T. van derKwast FGFR3 mutation analysis on voided urine for surveillance of patients with low-grade nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer Clin Cancer Res 16 2010 3011
17. J.M. van Oers, I. Lurkin, and A.J. van Exsel A simple and fast method for the simultaneous detection of nine fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 mutations in bladder cancer and voided urine Clin Cancer Res 11 2005 7743
18. W. Otto, S. Denzinger, and S. Bertz No mutations of FGFR3 in normal urothelium in the vicinity of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder harbouring activating FGFR3 mutations in patients with bladder cancer Int J Cancer 125 2009 2205
19. G. Mowatt, S. Zhu, and M. Kilonzo Systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of photodynamic diagnosis and urine biomarkers (FISH, ImmunoCyt, NMP22) and cytology for the detection and follow-up of bladder cancer Health Technol Assess 14 2010 1
20. B.W. van Rhijn, H.G. van derPoel, and T.H. van derKwast Urine markers for bladder cancer surveillance: a systematic review Eur Urol 47 2005 736
21. J.M. van Oers, C. Adam, and S. Denzinger Chromosome 9 deletions are more frequent than FGFR3 mutations in flat urothelial hyperplasias of the bladder Int J Cancer 119 2006 1212
22. G. Casetta, P. Gontero, and A. Zitella BTA quantitative assay and NMP22 testing compared with urine cytology in the detection of transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder Urol Int 65 2000 100
23. W.J. Ellis, B.A. Blumenstein, and L.M. Ishak Clinical evaluation of the BTA TRAK assay and comparison to voided urine cytology and the Bard BTA test in patients with recurrent bladder tumors The Multi Center Study Group Urology 50 1997 882
24. S. Ramakumar, J. Bhuiyan, and J.A. Besse Comparison of screening methods in the detection of bladder cancer J Urol 161 1999 388
25. M.N. van derAa, E.W. Steyerberg, and C. Bangma Cystoscopy revisited as the gold standard for detecting bladder cancer recurrence: diagnostic review bias in the randomized, prospective CEFUB trial J Urol 183 2009 76