The role of URO17™ biomarker to enhance diagnosis of urothelial cancer in new hematuria patients—First European Data

Evaluation of URO17® to improve non-invasive detection of bladder cancer

BACKGROUND

The gold standard for detecting bladder cancer is cystoscopy with biopsy or transurethral resection confirming histologic diagnosis. URO17® employs a chromogenically labeled monoclonal antibody to keratin 17 (k17), an intermediate filament cytoskeleton molecule associated with bladder, pancreatic, and cervical cancers. Preliminary studies evaluating k17 demonstrated a high sensitivity and specificity for the detection of bladder cancer, supporting the need for further study.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of URO17.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study of participants undergoing urologic procedures between July 6, 2018 and July 17, 2019 at a single institution. Patients undergoing cystectomy, endoscopic bladder and/or upper tract procedure for probable urothelial carcinoma comprised cases; patients undergoing urologic procedures for other reasons comprised the control group (i.e. prostatectomy, nephrectomy, etc.). Voided urine samples were at the time of procedure; a minority of participants underwent multiple resections in the study period, thus, as many as three urine samples were taken from any given participant. Samples were distributed for blinded testing with URO17. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated.

RESULTS

In 152 participants and 167 samples, URO17 demonstrated an overall sensitivity of 90% and 92% and a specificity of 88% and 87%, respectively. In 76 participants and 91 samples from patients with suspected urothelial carcinoma, the sensitivity was 90% and 92%, and the specificity was 50% and 54%, respectively. No controls demonstrated a positive URO17 result, and URO17 superseded urine cytology detection of low-grade and high-grade Ta. False positive results were associated with inflamed tissue or urothelial atypia on histology; the large majority had a history of intravesical therapy.

CONCLUSION

Limitations include cross-sectional design and convenience sampling. URO17 may improve sensitivity of urine cytology in the detection of urothelial cancer, though further study is required to refine the application of this biomarker in clinical practice.

Enhancing upper tract urothelial carcinoma diagnosis: Utility of cytokeratin 17 and CK20/CD44/p53 immunohistochemical panel

Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) presents diagnostic challenges due to small biopsy specimen size, poor orientation, and technical obstacles that can yield equivocal diagnoses. This uncertainty often mandates repeated biopsies to evaluate the necessity of nephroureterectomy. Prior studies have suggested cytokeratin 17 (CK17) immunostain as an adjunctive tool for diagnosing bladder urothelial neoplasia in both urine cytology and tissue biopsy specimens. We evaluated the utility of CK17 in differentiating UTUC from benign urothelium and its ability to stratify low-grade from high-grade neoplasia. Our study involved a cohort of previously diagnosed cytology (n = 29) and tissue specimens from biopsies and resections (n = 85). We evaluated CK17 staining percentage in cytology and tissue samples and localization patterns in biopsy/resection samples. Our findings showed a statistically significant distinction (p < 0.05) between UTUC and benign tissue specimens based on full thickness localization pattern (odds ratio 8.8 [95% CI 1.53-67.4]). The percentage of CK17 staining failed to significantly differentiate neoplastic from non-neoplastic cases in cytology or tissue samples. Additionally, based on prior research showing the efficacy of CK20/CD44/p53 triple panel in bladder urothelial neoplasia, we utilized tissue microarrays to evaluate if these markers could distinguish UTUC from benign urothelium. We found that CK20/CD44/p53, individually or in combination, could not distinguish urothelial neoplasia from non-neoplasia. Full thickness CK17 urothelial localization by immunohistochemistry was highly reproducible with excellent interobserver agreement and may play a supplementary role in distinguishing upper tract urothelial neoplasia from benign urothelium.

Urinary markers for bladder cancer diagnosis: A review of current status and future challenges

Bladder cancer is a common urological cancer with a high recurrence rate that requires long-term follow-up, and early detection positively affects prognosis. To date, the initial diagnosis and follow-up for bladder cancer rely on cystoscopy, which is an invasive and expensive procedure. Therefore, urinary markers for the detection of bladder cancer have attracted research attention for decades to reduce unnecessary cystoscopies. Urine, which is in continuous contact with bladder cancer, is considered a suitable fluid for providing tumor information. Urinary cytology is the only widely used urinary marker in clinical practice; however, it has poor sensitivity for low-grade tumors; indicating the need for novel urinary markers. Considerable research has been conducted on this topic over the years, resulting in a complex landscape with a wide range of urinary markers, including protein-, exfoliated cell-, RNA-, DNA-, and extracellular vesicle-based markers. Although some of these markers have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and are commercially available, their use in clinical practice is limited. To facilitate clinical application, potential urinary markers must withstand prospective clinical trials and be easy for patients and clinicians to understand and utilize in a clinical context. This review provides a comprehensive overview of currently available and recently reported promising urinary markers for bladder cancer. Additionally, the challenges and the prospects of these urinary markers for clinical implementation in bladder cancer treatment were discussed.

Current look at the most promising proteomic and glycomic biomarkers of bladder cancer

BACKGROUND

Bladder cancer (BC) belongs to the most frequent cancer types. The diagnostic process is still long and costly, with a high percentage of false-positive or -negative results. Due to the cost and lack of effectiveness, older methods need to be supplemented or replaced by a newer more reliable method. In this regard, proteins and glycoproteins pose high potential.

METHODS

We performed an online search in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to find relevant studies published in English up until May 2023. If applicable, we set the AUC threshold to 0.90 and sensitivity/specificity (SN/SP) to 90%.

FINDINGS

Protein and glycoprotein biomarkers are a demonstrably viable option in BC diagnostics. Cholinesterase shows promise in progression-free survival. BLCA-4, ORM-1 along with HTRA1 in the detection of BC. Matrix metallopeptidase 9 exhibits potential for stratification of muscle-invasive subtypes with high negative predictive value for aggressive phenotypes. Distinguishing non-muscle invasive subtypes benefits from Keratin 17. Neu5Gc-modified UMOD glycoproteins pose potential in BC diagnosis, while fibronectin, laminin-5, collagen type IV, and lamprey immunity protein in early detection of BC.

Molecular Markers for Bladder Cancer Screening: An Insight into Bladder Cancer and FDA-Approved Biomarkers

Bladder cancer is one of the most financially burdensome cancers globally, from its diagnostic to its terminal stages. The impact it imposes on patients and the medical community is substantial, exacerbated by the absence of disease-specific characteristics and limited disease-free spans. Frequent recurrences, impacting nearly half of the diagnosed population, require frequent and invasive monitoring. Given the advancing comprehension of its etiology and attributes, bladder cancer is an appealing candidate for screening strategies. Cystoscopy is the current gold standard for bladder cancer detection, but it is invasive and has the potential for undesired complications and elevated costs. Although urine cytology is a supplementary tool in select instances, its efficacy is limited due to its restricted sensitivity, mainly when targeting low-grade tumors. Although most of these assays exhibit higher sensitivity than urine cytology, clinical guidelines do not currently incorporate them. Consequently, it is necessary to explore novel screening assays to identify distinctive alterations exclusive to bladder cancer. Thus, integrating potential molecular assays requires further investigation through more extensive validation studies. Within this article, we offer a comprehensive overview of the critical features of bladder cancer while conducting a thorough analysis of the FDA-approved assays designed to diagnose and monitor its recurrences.

Comet-FISH analysis of urothelial cells. A screening opportunity for bladder cancer?

INTRODUCTION

Bladder cancer (BCa) is the most frequent cancer of the urinary tract, with more than 500,000 reported cases and nearly 200,000 related deaths yearly. Cystoscopy is the standard examination used for the initial diagnosis and follow-up of BCa in the noninvasive stage. However, the American Cancer Society does not include BCa screening in its list of recommended cancer screenings.

AREAS COVERED

Recently, several urine-based bladder tumor markers (UBBTMs) that identify genomic, transcriptomic, epigenetic, or protein alterations have been introduced, some of which have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to improve its diagnosis and surveillance. Several biomarkers have been found in the tissues and blood of individuals with BCa or predisposed to develop the disease, further enriching our information.

EXPERT OPINION

From a prevention perspective, alkaline Comet-FISH could be a valuable tool with broad potential for clinical application. Furthermore, a comet assay could be more beneficial for diagnosing and monitoring bladder cancer and determining individual susceptibility. Thus, we recommend further studies to understand the potential of this combined assay in the general population as a potential screening test and in patients initiated into the diagnostic process.

Perception of urinary biomarker tests among patients referred with suspected urological malignancy

Objective

To determine the acceptability of a non-invasive urinary biomarker test in place of conventional flexible cystoscopy for the diagnosis of bladder cancer in patients referred to a Rapid Access Haematuria Clinic (RAHC) with suspected urological malignancy.

Patients and methods

Patients attending a RAHC were recruited to a prospective observational study evaluating a novel urinary biomarker (URO17™) for the detection of bladder cancer and invited to complete a two-part structured questionnaire. Questions related to demographics, attitudes towards conventional cystoscopy and the minimal acceptable sensitivity (MAS) at which a urinary biomarker would be considered an alternative to flexible cystoscopy both before and after undergoing the procedure.

Results

A total of 250 patients completed the survey; the majority of whom were referred with visible haematuria (75.2%). One hundred seventy-one (68.4%) would be willing to accept a urinary biomarker in place of cystoscopy, with 59 (23.6%) expressing preference for the biomarker with a MAS as low as 85%. Conversely, 74 patients (29.6%) would not be willing to accept a urinary biomarker, regardless of its sensitivity. A significant number of patients reported a change in MAS after undergoing cystoscopy, with 80 (32.0%) and 16 (6.4%) increasing and decreasing the required value respectively (P = 0.001). The greatest increase was seen in the proportion of patients unwilling to accept a urinary biomarker regardless of its sensitivity, rising from 29.6% to 38.4%.

Conclusions

Although many patients attending a RAHC would be willing to accept a urinary biomarker test in place of conventional flexible cystoscopy for the detection of bladder cancer, effective patient, public and clinician engagement will be necessary at all stages of implementation if it is to become an established component of the diagnostic pathway.

Proteomics for Early Detection of Non-Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: Clinically Useful Urine Protein Biomarkers

Bladder cancer is the fourth most common cancer in men, and most cases are non-muscle-invasive. A high recurrence rate is a critical problem in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. The availability of few urine tests hinders the effective detection of superficial and small bladder tumors. Cystoscopy is the gold standard for diagnosis; however, it is associated with urinary tract infections, hematuria, and pain. Early detection is imperative, as intervention influences recurrence. Therefore, urinary biomarkers need to be developed to detect these bladder cancers. Recently, several protein candidates in the urine have been identified as biomarkers. In the present narrative review, the current status of the development of urinary protein biomarkers, including FDA-approved biomarkers, is summarized. Additionally, contemporary proteomic technologies, such as antibody-based methods, mass-spectrometry-based methods, and machine-learning-based diagnosis, are reported. Furthermore, new strategies for the rapid and correct profiling of potential biomarkers of bladder cancer in urine are introduced, along with their limitations. The advantages of urinary protein biomarkers and the development of several related technologies are highlighted in this review. Moreover, an in-depth understanding of the scientific background and available protocols in research and clinical applications of the surveillance of non-muscle bladder cancer is provided.

Biomarkers in Bladder Cancer Surveillance

Aim: This is a narrative review with an aim to summarise and describe urinary biomarkers in the surveillance of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). It provides a summary of FDA-approved protein biomarkers along with emerging ones which utilise genetic, epigenetic and exosomal markers. We discuss the current limitations of the available assays. Background: Current guidelines advice a combination of cystoscopy, imaging,and urine cytology in diagnosis and surveillance. Although cytology has a high specificity, it is limited by low sensitivity particularly in low grade tumours. There are six FDA-approved urinary assays for diagnosis and surveillance of bladder cancer. They have shown to improve sensitivity and specificity to be used alongside cytology and cystoscopy but have a lower specificity in comparison to cytology and false positives often occur in benign conditions. Recent developments in laboratory techniques has allowed for use of markers which are RNA-, DNA-based as well as extracellular vesicles in the past decade. Methods: Using the PubMed/Medline search engines as well as Google Scholar, we performed an online search using the terms "bladder cancer," "non-muscle invasive bladder cancer," and "urine biomarkers" with filter for articles in English published up to May 2021. Systematic reviews and original data of clinical trials or observational studies which contributed to the development of the biomarkers were collated. Results: Biomarkers identified were divided into FDA-approved molecular biomarkers, protein biomarkers and gene-related biomarker with a table summarising the findings of each marker with the most relevant studies. The studies conducted were mainly retrospective. Due to the early stages of development, only a few prospective studies have been done for more recently developed biomarkers and limited meta-analyses are available.Therefore a detailed evaluation of these markers are still required to decide on their clinical use. Conclusion: Advancements of analytical methods in BC has driven the research towards non-invasive liquid-based biomarkers in adjunct to urine cytology. Further large prospective studies are required to determine its feasibility in a clinical setting as they are not effective when used in isolation as they have their limitation. With the ongoing pandemic, other than reduction in costs and increased accuracy, the need for biomarkers to cope with delay in cystoscopies in diagnosis and surveillance is crucial. Thus clinical trials with direct comparison is required to improve patient care.