Lotan - Figure 11
Urinary Markers
FIG. 11: When we summarize the findings for urine-based biomarkers, we recognize that sensitivities are superior for these markers compared to cytology, but the main impact is in low-grade cancers. All specificities thus far, however, have been inferior to cytology, and no single marker has demonstrated superior clinical utility over cytology and cystoscopy combined.
In sum, there is no current ideal marker, and routine use is not recommended either by the European Urological Association (EAU)[4] or the American Urologic Association guidelines.[5,6] The conclusion must be that physicians will have to select appropriate markers according to specific clinical need, and this will be the subject of the discussion to follow in the Figures below.
References
Kamat AM, Hegarty PK, Gee JR, et al; International Consultation on Urologic Disease-European Association of Urology Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012. ICUD-EAU International Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012: Screening, diagnosis, and molecular markers. Eur Urol. 2013;63:4−15 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.09.057
Chang SS, Boorjian SA, Chou R, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: AUA/SUO Guideline. J Urol. 2016;196:1021−9 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.06.049
Chang SS, Bochner BH, Chou R, et al. Treatment of non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer: AUA/ASCO/ASTRO/SUO Guideline. J Urol. Published online April 26, 2017 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.04.086
