Haematuria work-up in general care-A German observational study

Prevalence of prostate cancer in men with haematuria: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the prevalence of prostate cancer in men attending evaluation for haematuria, as this could help healthcare providers to determine whether men with haematuria should have prostate examinations performed.

METHODS

The study was performed according to a pre-specified protocol uploaded to the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42022299383). A systematic search of MEDLINE, Ovid and Google Scholar was performed in December 2021. Two independent researchers evaluated all titles, available abstracts, and full texts. We included studies on adult men (aged ≥18 years) describing haematuria and prostate cancer.

RESULTS

We screened 4252 titles and abstracts when available and assessed 350 studies in full text. In total, 65 studies were included and 42 was summarised in a meta-analysis. In total, 18 752 men with haematuria were included, and the pooled prevalence (95% confidence interval [CI]) of prostate cancer was 3.0% (2.0-4.1%). In men with macroscopic haematuria, the pooled prevalence (95% CI) of prostate cancer was 5.9% (2.9-9.9%; n = 265/5373). In men with microscopic haematuria, the pooled prevalence (95% CI) of prostate cancer was 1.4% (0.8-2.2%; n = 71/6642).

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that the prevalence of prostate cancer is considerable in men attending evaluation for haematuria. Therefore, digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen measurement should become a standard procedure for all men with haematuria, especially for men with macroscopic haematuria.

Biomarkers to assess the risk of bladder cancer in patients presenting with haematuria are gender-specific

Introduction

Haematuria is a common red flag symptom of urinary tract cancer. Bladder cancer (BC) is the most common cancer to present with haematuria. Women presenting with haematuria are often underdiagnosed. Currently, no gender-specific tests are utilized in clinical practice. Considerable healthcare resources are needed to investigate causes of haematuria and this study was set up to help identify markers of BC. The aim of the study was to define biomarker algorithms in haematuria patients using an expanded panel of biomarkers to diagnose BC and investigate if the algorithms are gender-specific.

Materials and Methods

A total of n=675 patients with a history of haematuria were recruited from Northern Ireland hospitals. Patients were collected on a 2:1 ratio, non-BC (control) n=474: BC n=201. A detailed clinical history, urine and blood samples were collected. Biomarkers, known to be involved in the pathobiology underlying bladder carcinogenesis were investigated. Biomarkers differentially expressed between groups were investigated using Wilcoxon rank sum and linear regression.

Results

Biomarkers were gender specific. Two biomarker-algorithms were identified to triage haematuria patients; male - u_NSE, s_PAI-1/tPA, u_midkine, u_NGAL, u_MMP-9/TIMP-1 and s_prolactin (u=urine; s=serum); sensitivity 71.8%, specificity 72.8%; AUROC 0.795; and female urine biomarkers - IL-12p70, IL-13, midkine and clusterin; sensitivity 83.7%, specificity 79.7%; AUROC 0.865. Addition of the clinical variable infection to both algorithms increased both AUROC to 0.822 (DeLong p=0.014) and to 0.923 (DeLong p=0.004) for males and females, respectively. Combining clinical risk factors with biomarker algorithms would enable application of the algorithms to triage haematuria patients.

Conclusion

Using gender-specific biomarker algorithms in combination with clinical risks that are associated with BC would allow clinicians to better manage haematuria patients and potentially reduce underdiagnosis in females. In this study, we demonstrate, for the first time, that blood and urine biomarkers are gender-specific when assessing risk of BC in patients who present with blood in their urine. Combining biomarker data with clinical factors could improve triage when referring patients for further investigations.

Systematic Review of the Incidence of and Risk Factors for Urothelial Cancers and Renal Cell Carcinoma Among Patients with Haematuria

CONTEXT

The current impact of haematuria investigations on health care organisations is significant. There is currently no consensus on how to investigate patients with haematuria.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the incidence of bladder cancer, upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) among patients undergoing investigation for haematuria and identify any risk factors for bladder cancer, UTUC, and RCC (BUR).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane controlled trials databases and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for all relevant publications from January 1, 2000 to June 2021 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Prospective, retrospective, and cross-sectional studies with a minimum population of 50 patients with haematuria were considered for the review.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 44 studies were included. The total number of participants was 229701. The pooled incidence rate for urothelial bladder cancer was 17% (95% confidence interval [CI] 14-20%) for visible haematuria (VH) and 3.3% (95% CI 2.45-4.3%) for nonvisible haematuria (NVH). The pooled incidence rate for RCC was 2% (95% CI 1-2%) for VH and 0.58% (95% CI 0.42-0.77%) for NVH. The pooled incidence rate for UTUC was 0.75% (95% CI 0.4-1.2%) for VH and 0.17% (95% CI 0.081-0.299%) for NVH. On sensitivity analysis, the proportions of males (risk ratio [RR] 1.14, 95% CI 1.10-1.17 for VH; 1.54, 95% CI 1.34-1.78 for NVH; p < 0.00001; moderate certainty evidence) and individuals with a smoking history (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.24-1.61 for VH; 1.53, 95% CI 1.36-1.72 for NVH; p < 0.00001; moderate certainty evidence) appeared to be higher in BUR than in non-BUR groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Male gender and smoking history are risk factors for BUR cancer in haematuria, with bladder cancer being the commonest cancer. The incidence of RCC and UTUC in NVH is low. The review serves as a reference standard for future policy-making on investigation of haematuria by global organisations.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Our review shows that male gender and smoking history are risk factors for cancers of the bladder, kidney, and ureter. The review also provides information on the proportion of patients who have cancer when they have blood in their urine (haematuria) and will allow policy-makers to decide on the most appropriate method for investigating haematuria in patients.

Assessment of Diagnostic Yield of Cystoscopy and Computed Tomographic Urography for Urinary Tract Cancers in Patients Evaluated for Microhematuria: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Microhematuria (MH) is a common finding that often leads to further evaluation for urinary tract cancers. There is ongoing debate about the extent to which patients with MH should be evaluated for cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the diagnostic yield for detection of urinary tract cancers, specifically bladder cancer, upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), and kidney cell carcinoma, among patients evaluated for MH using cystoscopy and computed tomographic (CT) urography.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase were systematically searched for eligible studies published between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Original prospective and retrospective studies reporting the prevalence of cancer among patients evaluated for MH were eligible. Two authors independently screened the titles and abstracts to select studies that met the eligibility criteria and reached consensus about which studies to include. Among 5802 records identified, 5802 articles were screened using titles and abstracts. After exclusions, 55 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, with 39 studies selected for systematic review.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Studies were quantitatively synthesized using a random-intercept logistic regression model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was diagnostic yield, defined as the proportion of patients with a diagnosis of urinary tract cancer (bladder cancer, UTUC, or kidney cell carcinoma) after presentation with MH. Studies were stratified by the percentage of cystoscopy and CT urography use and by high-risk cohorts. The diagnostic yields of CT urography and cystoscopy were calculated for each cancer type.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies comprising 24 366 patients evaluated for MH were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled diagnostic yield among all patients was 2.00% (95% CI, 1.30%-3.09%) for bladder cancer, 0.02% (95% CI, 0.0%-0.15%) for UTUC, and 0.18% (95% CI, 0.09%-0.36%) for kidney cell carcinoma. Stratification of studies that used cystoscopy and/or CT urography for 95% or more of the cohort produced diagnostic yields of 2.74% (95% CI, 1.81%-4.12%) for bladder cancer, 0.09% (95% CI, 0.01%-0.75%) for UTUC, and 0.10% (95% CI, 0.04%-0.23%) for kidney cell carcinoma. In high-risk cohorts, the diagnostic yields increased to 4.61% (95% CI, 2.34%-8.90%) for bladder cancer and 0.45% (95% CI, 0.22%-0.95%) for UTUC.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study's findings suggest that, given the low diagnostic yield of CT urography and the associated risks and costs, limiting its use to high-risk patients older than 50 years is warranted. Risk stratification, as recommended by the recent American Urology Association guidelines on MH, may be a better approach to tailor further evaluation.

Diagnostic utility of axial imaging in the evaluation of hematuria: A systematic review and critical appraisal of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Increasing severity of hematuria is instinctively associated with higher likelihood of urological malignancy. However, the robustness of the evidentiary base for this assertion is unclear, particularly as it relates to the likelihood of upper urinary tract pathology. Thus, the value of axial imaging in the diagnostic workup of hematuria is unclear due to differences in the underlying patient populations, raising concern for sampling bias. We performed a systematic review to characterize the literature and association between severity of hematuria and likelihood of upper urinary tract cancer based on axial imaging.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane were systematically searched for all studies reporting on adult patients presenting with hematuria. We used Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) for reporting of this systematic review and meta-analysis and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for risk of bias assessment. Degree of hematuria was classified as "microscopic," "gross," or "unspecified." Three urological malignancies (bladder, upper tract urothelial, and renal cancer) were considered both individually and in aggregate. Random-effects model with pairwise comparisons was employed to arrive at the axial imaging diagnostic yields.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were included, of which six (20.7%) reported on patients with gross hematuria only, four (13.8%) reported on patients with microscopic hematuria only, seven (24.1%) included both, and 12 (41.4%) did not define or specify the severity of hematuria. Of 29 studies, two (6.9%) were at high-risk of bias, 21 (72.4%) at intermediate-risk, and six (20.7%) at low-risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa criteria. Based on axial imaging, rates of diagnoses of renal, upper tract urothelial, and bladder cancers differed with differing severity of hematuria. Notably, rates of renal and upper tract urothelial carcinoma were higher in studies of patients with unspecified hematuria severity (3.6% and 10.4%, respectively) than among patients with gross hematuria (1.5% and 1.3%, respectively). When all urological malignancies were pooled, patients with unspecified hematuria were diagnosed more frequently (19.5%) compared to those with gross (15.3%) and microscopic hematuria (4.5%, difference=1.51%, 99% confidence interval 3.6-26.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of granularity in the available literature, particularly with regards to patients with unspecified hematuria severity, limits the generalizability of these results and highlights the need for future studies that provide sufficient baseline information, allowing for firmer conclusions to be drawn.

The Investigation of Hematuria

BACKGROUND

Hematuria can be either grossly visible (macrohematuria) or only detectable under a microscope (microhematuria). Microhematuria is often asymptomatic and has a prevalence of 4-5% in routine clinical practice. It may be due to an underlying disease of the kidneys or the urogenital tract. In this article, we provide an overview of the causes of hematuria and of the recommendations of current guidelines for its diagnostic evaluation. A risk-adapted diagnostic strategy for the evaluation of asymptomatic microhematuria (aMH) is presented.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed, as well as on guidelines from Germany and abroad.

RESULTS

Hematuria has many causes, and a broad urological and nephrological differential diagnosis must be considered. In the absence of high-quality scientific evidence, the recommendations of current guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of hematuria are not uniform; this is particularly so for aMH. Microhematuria is said to be present when urine microscopy reveals three or more erythrocytes per highpower field. The basic diagnostic evaluation consists of a thorough history and physical examination, measurement of inflammatory parameters and renal function tests, and ultrasonography of the kidneys and bladder. Patients with non-glomerular aMH who have risk factors such as smoking, advanced age, and male sex are more likely to have relevant underlying conditions and should therefore undergo augmented, risk-adapted diagnostic evaluation with urethrocystoscopy, urine cytology, and, when indicated, CT urography. Patients with isolated glomerular hematuria are at elevated risk for renal disease and should undergo follow-up checks at six-month intervals.

CONCLUSION

Although hematuria is common, there is no uniform, internationally accepted, evidence-based algorithm for its diagnostic evaluation. All potential causes of hematuria must be considered, and all individual risk factors taken into account, so that an underlying disease requiring treatment can be identified or ruled out.