Bladder cancer markers in patient management: the current perspective

Molecular markers for bladder cancer screening, early diagnosis, and surveillance: the WHO/ICUD consensus

Due to the lack of disease-specific symptoms, diagnosis and follow-up of bladder cancer has remained a challenge to the urologic community. Cystoscopy, commonly accepted as a gold standard for the detection of bladder cancer, is invasive and relatively expensive, while urine cytology is of limited value specifically in low-grade disease. Over the last decades, numerous molecular assays for the diagnosis of urothelial cancer have been developed and investigated with regard to their clinical use. However, although all of these assays have been shown to have superior sensitivity as compared to urine cytology, none of them has been included in clinical guidelines. The key reason for this situation is that none of the assays has been included into clinical decision-making so far. We reviewed the current status and performance of modern molecular urine tests following systematic analysis of the value and limitations of commercially available assays. Despite considerable advances in recent years, the authors feel that at this stage the added value of molecular markers for the diagnosis of urothelial tumors has not yet been identified. Current data suggest that some of these markers may have the potential to play a role in screening and surveillance of bladder cancer. Well-designed protocols and prospective, controlled trials will be needed to provide the basis to determine whether integration of molecular markers into clinical decision-making will be of value in the future.

Urine markers for detection and surveillance of bladder cancer

OBJECTIVES

Bladder cancer detection and surveillance includes cystoscopy and cytology. Urinary cytology is limited by its low sensitivity for low-grade tumors. Urine markers have been extensively studied to help improve the diagnosis of bladder cancer with the goal of complementing or even replacing cystoscopy. However, to date, no marker has reached widespread use owing to insufficient evidence for clinical benefit.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Pubmed/Medline search was conducted to identify original articles, review articles, and editorials regarding urine-based biomarkers for screening, early detection, and surveillance of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Searches were limited to the English language, with a time frame of 2000 to 2013. Keywords included urothelial carcinoma, bladder cancer, transitional cell carcinoma, biomarker, marker, urine, diagnosis, recurrence, and progression.

RESULTS

Although several urinary markers have shown higher sensitivity compared with cytology, it remains insufficient to replace cystoscopy. Moreover, most markers suffer from lower specificity than cytology. In this review, we aimed to summarize the current knowledge on commercially available and promising investigational urine markers for the detection and surveillance of bladder cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Well-designed protocols and prospective, controlled trials are needed to provide the basis to determine whether integration of biomarkers into clinical decision making will be of value for bladder cancer detection and screening in the future.

Statistical consideration for clinical biomarker research in bladder cancer

OBJECTIVE

To critically review and illustrate current methodological and statistical considerations for bladder cancer biomarker discovery and evaluation.

METHODS

Original, review, and methodological articles, and editorials were reviewed and summarized.

RESULTS

Biomarkers may be useful at multiple stages of bladder cancer management: early detection, diagnosis, staging, prognosis, and treatment; however, few novel biomarkers are currently used in clinical practice. The reasons for this disjunction are many and reflect the long and difficult pathway from candidate biomarker discovery to clinical assay, and the lack of coherent and comprehensive processes (pipelines) for biomarker development. Conceptually, the development of new biomarkers should be a process that is similar to therapeutic drug evaluation-a highly regulated process with carefully regulated phases from discovery to human applications. In a further effort to address the pervasive problem of inadequacies in the design, analysis, and reporting of biomarker prognostic studies, a set of reporting recommendations are discussed. For example, biomarkers should provide unique information that adds to known clinical and pathologic information. Conventional multivariable analyses are not sufficient to demonstrate improved prediction of outcomes. Predictive models, including or excluding any new putative biomarker, need to show clinically significant improvement of performance in order to claim any real benefit. Towards this end, proper model building, avoidance of overfitting, and external validation are crucial. In addition, it is important to choose appropriate performance measures dependent on outcome and prediction type and to avoid the use of cutpoints. Biomarkers providing a continuous score provide potentially more useful information than cutpoints since risk fits a continuum model. Combination of complementary and independent biomarkers is likely to better capture the biological potential of a tumor than any single biomarker. Finally, methods that incorporate clinical consequences such as decision curve analysis are crucial to the evaluation of biomarkers.

CONCLUSIONS

Attention to sound design and statistical practice should be delivered as early as possible and will help maximize the promise of biomarkers for patient care. Studies should include a measure of predictive accuracy and clinical decision-analysis. External validation using data from an independent cohort provides the strongest evidence that a model is valid. There is a need for adequately assessed clinical biomarkers in bladder cancer.

Clusterin as a diagnostic and prognostic marker for transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder

We investigated the feasibility of profiling and measuring the concentration of clusterin in urine and serum for individuals with transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) of the bladder and comparing it with nontumor controls. In addition, we analyzed the correlation of expression of clusterin in specimens of TCC to various clinicopathologic parameters and prognosis of bladder cancer. Blood and urine samples were used from 68 patients with TCC of the bladder and from 61 patients with benign urological diseases. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) were performed for clusterin from serum and urine. Quantitation of clusterin mRNA was carried out in 68 bladder tumor specimens from radical cystectomy or transurethral resection and 26 normal bladder specimens from BPH patients by using RT-PCR method. Correlation for the expression of clusterin mRNA with clinicopathologic parameters was analyzed. Serum and urine clusterin was significantly higher in individuals with bladder cancer than control (p = 0.001). Sensitivity and specificity of serum and urine clusterin as a tumor marker for TCC of the bladder was found to be 80%, 91%, 87.1% and 96.7% respectively. Clusterin expression was significantly higher in TCC specimens than normal tissue specimens (P < 0.001). Expression of clusterin was significantly higher in patients with invasive TCC of the bladder than that in patients with superficial TCC and control (P < 0.001). Overexpression of clusterin mRNA was significantly associated with tumor recurrence and overall survival (p < 0.001). The recurrence-free survival time of patients with overexpression of clusterin was significantly shorter than that of patients with weak expression of clusterin (9.8 months vs. 35.2 months). Clusterin may be considered as a potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarker for bladder cancer using urine, serum and/or molecular biology techniques.