荧光原位杂交技术在上尿路的尿路上皮癌诊断中的临床意义

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (674 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要 目的:分析荧光原位杂交技术(FISH)诊断上尿路的尿路上皮癌的敏感性和特异性,进一步评估FISH检测上尿路尿路上皮癌的临床意义。方法:回顾性分析144例临床疑似的上尿路尿路上皮癌病例FISH检测结果,将各组FISH检测结果与病理学结果进行对照比较,总结FISH检测上尿路尿路上皮癌的敏感性和特异性。结果:病理诊断尿路上皮癌101例(肾盂癌49例、输尿管癌47例、肾盂合并输尿管癌5例)、尿路上皮良性病变33例,另有10例病理诊断为肾细胞癌。101例尿路上皮癌中,FISH阳性55例、阴性46例;FISH敏感性为54.5%。33例良性病例中,阴性31例、FISH阳性2例,特异性为93.9%。FISH检测高级别上尿路尿路上皮癌敏感性为58.9%;低级别肿瘤敏感性28.6%; 10例肾细胞癌中透明细胞癌8例,乳头状肾细胞癌2例,其中FISH阳性4例、阴性6例。结论:FISH对于检测上尿路的尿路上皮癌具有较高的敏感性和高度特异性,是临床诊断上尿路的尿路上皮癌的一种重要的无创检查手段。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	陈松
	徐阿祥
	孙圣坤
	杨淑霞
	张旭

关键词 ：荧光原位杂交, 尿路上皮癌, 上尿路

Abstract：Objective:To study the clinical utility of a fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assay in the diagnosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). Methods:Voided urine specimens from 144 patients with suspected upper tract urothelial carcinoma were analyzed by means of FISH assay. The specificity and sensitivity of FISH were analyzed on the basis of pathological diagnosis. Results:Of all the 144 patients, 101 were diagnosed as having UTUC. For FISH assay, the sensitivity was 54.5% and specificity was 93.9%. Conclusions:With its high sensitivity and excellent specificity, FISH assay may be a promising ancillary test and a reliable non-invasive approach to the diagnosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

Key words： urothelial carcinoma upper tract fluorescence in situ hybridization

收稿日期: 2014-05-16

ZTFLH:

R737

基金资助:卫生部行业基金子课题(201002010)

通讯作者: 徐阿祥,xuaxiang301@sina.com

引用本文:

陈松,徐阿祥,孙圣坤,杨淑霞,张旭. 荧光原位杂交技术在上尿路的尿路上皮癌诊断中的临床意义[J]. 微创泌尿外科杂志, 2014, 3(3): 181-185.
Chen Song,Xu Axiang,Sun Shengkun,Yang Shuxia,Zhang Xu. Clinical utility of fluorescence in situ hybridization in the diagnosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma. JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE UROLOGY, 2014, 3(3): 181-185.

链接本文:

http://journal20.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_zgmnwk/CN/abstract/abstract909.shtml 或 http://journal20.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_zgmnwk/CN/Y2014/V3/I3/181

[1]Rouprêt M, Babjuk M, Compérat E, et al. European Guidelines on Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinomas: 2013 Update. Eur Urol, 2013, 63:1059-1071.
[2]徐阿祥,杨素霞,孙圣坤,等.尿脱落细胞荧光原位杂交技术在尿路上皮癌诊断中的应用.临床泌尿外科杂志,2012,27(10):753-755.
[3]Marín-Aguilera M, Mengual L, Ribal MJ, et al. Utility of fluorescence in situ hybridization as a non-invasive technique in the diagnosis of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma. Eur Urol, 2007,51(2):409-415.
[4]穆大为,周利群,丁义,等. 应用荧光原位杂交技术检测上尿路的尿路上皮癌可显著提高诊断敏感性.北京大学学报(医学版),2010,42(4):381-385.
[5]Fadl-Elmula I, Gorunova L, Mandahl N, et al. Cytogenetic analysis of upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinomas. Cancer Genet Cytogenet, 1999,115(2):123-127.
[6]Akkad T, Brunner A, Pallwein L, et al. Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization for Detecting Upper Urinary Tract Tumors-A Preliminary Report. Urology, 2007,70(4): 753-757.
[7]Luo B, Li W, Deng CH, et al. Utility of fluorescence in situ hybridization in the diagnosis of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma. Cancer Genet Cytogenet, 2009,189(2):93-97.
[8]Mian C, Mazzoleni G, Vikoler S, et al. Fluorescence in situ hybridization in the diagnosis of upper urinary tract tumours. Eur Urol, 2010,58(2):288-292.
[9]Xu C, Zeng Q, Hou J, et al. Utility of a modality combining FISH and cytology in upper tract urothelial carcinoma detection in voided urine samples of Chinese patients. Urology, 2011,77(3): 636-641.
[10]Reid-Nicholson MD, Motiwala N, Drury SC, et al. Chromosomal abnormalities in renal cell carcinoma variants detected by Urovysion fluorescence in situ hybridization on paraffin-embedded tissue. Ann Diagn Pathol, 2011,15(1):37-45.
[11]Reid-Nicholson MD, Ramalingam P, Adeagbo B, et al. The use of Urovysion fluorescence in situ hybridization in the diagnosis and surveillance of non-urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Mod Pathol, 2009,22(1):119-127.
[12]Lughezzani G, Burger M, Margulis V, et al. Prognostic factors in upper urinary tract urothelial carcinomas: a comprehensive review of the current literature. Eur Urol, 2012,62(1):100-114.
[13]Pieras E, Frontera G, Ruiz X, et al. Concomitant carcinoma in situ and tumour size are prognostic factors for bladder recurrence after nephroureterectomy for upper tract transitional cell carcinoma. BJU Int, 2010,106(9):1319-1323.
[14]Wheat JC, Weizer AZ, Wolf JS Jr, et al. Concomitant carcinoma in situ is a feature of aggressive disease in patients with organ confined urothelial carcinoma following radical nephroureterectomy. Urol Oncol, 2012,30(3):252-258.
[15]Youssef RF, Shariat SF, Lotan Y, et al. Prognostic effect of urinary bladder carcinoma in situ on clinical outcome of subsequent upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Urology, 2011,77(4):861-866.
[16]Williamson SR, Montironi R, Lopez-Beltran A, et al. Diagnosis, evaluation and treatment of carcinoma in situ of the urinary bladder: the state of the art. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol, 2010,76(2):112-126.
[17]Halling KC, King W, Sokolova IA, et al. A comparison of cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization for the detection of urothelial carcinoma. J Urol, 2000,164(5):1768-1775.
[18]Sarosdy MF, Schellhammer P, Bokinsky G, et al. Clinical evaluation of a multi-target fluorescent in situ hybridization assay for detection of bladder cancer. J Urol, 2002,168(5):1950-1954.
[19]Schwarz S, Rechenmacher M, Filbeck T, et al. Value of multicolour fluorescence in situ hybridisation (UroVysion) in the differential diagnosis of flat urothelial lesions. J Clin Pathol, 2008,61(3):272-277.