Search

Background The objective of the current study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of 2 new real-time polymerase chain reaction-based urinary markers with each other and with urinary cytology, cystoscopy, and/or histology in patients being followed for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Methods A total of 487 patients were enrolled in the study. Patients were evaluated using voided urine cytology, the Xpert Bladder Cancer Monitor, the Bladder EpiCheck test, and white light cystoscopy. Results The overall sensitivity was 27.17% for cytology, 64.13% for the Bladder EpiCheck test, and 66.3% for the Xpert Bladder Cancer Monitor. The overall specificity was 98.82% for cytology, 82.06% for the Bladder EpiCheck test, and 76.47% for the Xpert Bladder Cancer Monitor. The negative predictive value was very similar for the 3 tests at 83.56% for cytology, 89.42% for the Bladder EpiCheck test, and 89.35% for the Xpert Bladder Cancer Monitor. When combined, the Bladder EpiCheck test and Xpert Bladder Cancer Monitor detected overall 79.35% of the tumors: 70.37% in low-grade and 92.11% in high-grade tumors. Conclusions The Xpert Bladder Cancer Monitor and Bladder EpiCheck test were found to perform very well in terms of sensitivity. Together, the 2 tests detected approximately 92.11% of high-grade tumors. Their specificity was high but could not reach the excellent value of cytology. The negative predictive value was the same for both tests and was higher than that for cytology, especially when the tests were used together (92.24%). These 2 new tests hold promise as urinary biomarkers. They may be used in combination to maximize sensitivity in a less invasive way, thereby reducing invasiveness in the follow-up of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and decreasing discomfort for the patients as well as complications and costs.

Background The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the Bladder EpiCheck test in the follow-up of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) and to compare it with the accuracy of urinary cytology, cystoscopy, and/or histology. Methods In total, 243 patients were enrolled in the current study. Patients were evaluated by voided urine cytology, by the Bladder EpiCheck test, and by white-light cystoscopy. Results Overall sensitivity was 33.3% for cytology, 62.3% for Bladder EpiCheck, and 66.7% for the 2 tests combined. The sensitivity of cytology increased from 7.7% in low-grade (LG) tumors to 66.6% in high-grade (HG) tumors; whereas, for the Bladder EpiCheck test, the sensitivity was 46.1% in LG tumors and 83.3% in HG tumors. Combined cytology and Bladder EpiCheck testing yielded an overall sensitivity of 56.4% for LG tumors and 90% for HG tumors. Overall specificity was 98.6% for cytology, 86.3% for Bladder EpiCheck, and 85.6% for the 2 tests combined. The positive predictive value was 92% for cytology and 68.2% for Bladder EpiCheck. For the 2 tests combined, it was 68.6%. The negative predictive value was similar for the 2 tests: 75.8% for cytology, 82.9% for Bladder EpiCheck, and 84.5% for the 2 tests combined. Conclusions The sensitivity of the Bladder EpiCheck test was significantly higher than that of cytology. The test performed very well in terms of specificity but could not reach the high value of cytology. The positive predictive value was higher for Bladder EpiCheck, whereas the negative predictive value was approximately the same for both tests.