A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Utility of fluorescence hybridization analysis for detecting upper urinary tract-urothelial carcinoma. | LitMetric

Utility of fluorescence hybridization analysis for detecting upper urinary tract-urothelial carcinoma.

J Cancer Res Ther

Minimally Invasive Urology Center, Shandong Provincial Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.

Published: May 2018

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study aimed to assess the effectiveness of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for detecting upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UUT-UC) compared to traditional cytology.
  • Between 2011 and 2015, urine samples from 52 patients with UUT-UC and 26 control patients were analyzed, revealing that FISH had a sensitivity of 79.5% and specificity of 96.3%, significantly outperforming cytology.
  • The results suggest that FISH could serve as a reliable, non-invasive diagnostic tool for patients suspected of having UUT-UC.

Article Abstract

Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical utility of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in the detection of upper urinary tract-urothelial carcinoma (UUT-UC).

Methods: Between November 2011 and November 2015, voided urine specimens from 52 consecutive patients with UUT-UC and 26 controls were collected for both FISH test and cytology. Sensitivity and specificity of FISH test and cytology were determined and compared. The frequency of chromosomal aberrations was also analyzed.

Results: For FISH analysis, the sensitivity was 79.5% and specificity was 96.3%. For cytology, the sensitivity was 27.3% and specificity was 100%. The overall sensitivity for FISH was significantly higher than that of in single value-based urine cytology (79.5% vs. 27.3%, respectively, P < 0.001). The sensitivities of FISH and cytology by grade were 64.3% vs. 28.6% for low-grade urothelial carcinomas (P = 0.128) and 86.7% vs. 26.7% for high-grade urothelial carcinomas (P < 0.001), respectively. Twenty-seven (77.1%) cases were positive due to the gain of two or more chromosomes in five or more urinary cells, among which, 21 (60%) cases showed positivity in all the 4 chromosomes, 7 (20%) cases matched the criterion that 10 or more cells gained a single chromosome, whereas only 1 (2.9%) case was positive because of the homozygous deletion of 9p21 in 12 or more cells.

Conclusions: FISH has superior sensitivity and similar specificity in the detection of UUT-UC, compared with cytology. The present findings indicated that FISH can be applied as a noninvasive diagnostic tool for suspected UUT-UC patients.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_74_17DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

utility fluorescence
8
upper urinary
8
urinary tract-urothelial
8
tract-urothelial carcinoma
8
fish
8
fish test
8
test cytology
8
cytology sensitivity
8
sensitivity specificity
8
urothelial carcinomas
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!