Korean J Lab Med.  2007 Apr;27(2):106-110. 10.3343/kjlm.2007.27.2.106.

Evaluation of Urine NMP22 Point-of-Care Test for the Screening of Bladder Cancer

• Ihm CH
• Kim JM
• Sohn YH

• KMID: 1781468
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3343/kjlm.2007.27.2.106

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Screening of high-risk patients using bladder tumor markers can offer an advantage of early detection and saving medical costs. For these purpose many tumor markers have been developed to supplement invasive cystoscopy. Our study evaluated the NMP22 point-of-care test (NMP22 POCT), which is one of the tumor makers, comparing with the standard urine cytology for the diagnosis of bladder cancer. METHODS: From January to September 2005, 232 patients who had undergone a cystoscopy due to bladder cancer associated symptoms including hematuria and dysuria were enrolled in this study. Urine specimens were collected for NMP22 POCT and cytology. NMP22 POCT and urine cytology were compared for sensitivity and specificity. In addition, we evaluated urine stick test and microscopy to explain some false-positive results in NMP22 POCT. RESULTS: Superficial transitional cell carcinoma was diagnosed in 10 patients. The sensitivity of NMP22 test was 60% (95% confidence interval [CI], 26.2-87.8%), whereas that of cytology was 33.3% (95% CI, 7.5-70.1%); however, the difference was not significant. The specificity of NMP22 test was 69.8% (95% CI, 63.3-75.8%), compared with 99.0% (95% CI, 96.5-99.9%) for cytology (P<0.001). The presence of microscopic RBCs in urine specimen was significantly associated with the lower specificity of NMP22 POCT (P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: NMP22 POCT was significantly less specific than urine cytology. To be useful as a bladder cancer screening test, the NMP22 test should have a higher specificity.

Keyword

Bladder cancer; Nuclear Matrix Protein 22 (NMP22); Tumor marker; Point-of-care test

MeSH Terms

Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Nuclear Proteins/*urine
Point-of-Care Systems
Sensitivity and Specificity
Tumor Markers, Biological/*urine
Urinary Bladder/pathology
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/*diagnosis/urine
Urine/cytology

Reference

References

1. Heney NM, Ahmed S, Flanagan MJ, Frable W, Corder MP, Hafermann MD, et al. Superficial bladder cancer: progression and recurrence. J Urol. 1983; 130:1083–6.

2. Hudson MA, Herr HW. Carcinoma in situ of the bladder. J Urol. 1995; 153:564–72.

3. Lokeshwar VB, Habuchi T, Grossman HB, Murphy WM, Hautmann SH, Hemstreet GP 3rd, et al. Bladder tumor markers beyond cytology: International Consensus Panel on bladder tumor markers. Urology. 2005; 66:35–63.

4. Malik SN, Murphy WM. Monitoring patients for bladder neoplasms: what can be expected of urinary cytology consultations in clinical practice. Urology. 1999; 54:62–6.

5. Bassi P, De Marco V, De Lisa A, Mancini M, Pinto F, Bertoloni R, et al. Non-invasive diagnostic tests for bladder cancer: a review of the literature. Urol Int. 2005; 75:193–200.

6. Quek ML, Sanderson K, Daneshmand S, Stein JP. New molecular markers for bladder cancer detection. Curr Opin Urol. 2004; 14:259–64.

7. Miyanaga N, Akaza H, Ishikawa S, Ohtani M, Noguchi R, Kawai K, et al. Clinical evaluation of nuclear matrix protein 22 (NMP22) in urine as a novel marker for urothelial cancer. Eur Urol. 1997; 31:163–8.

8. Glas AS, Roos D, Deutekom M, Zwinderman AH, Bossuyt PM, Kurth KH. Tumor markers in the diagnosis of primary bladder cancer. A systematic review. J Urol. 2003; 169:1975–82.

9. Grossman HB, Messing E, Soloway M, Tomera K, Katz G, Berger Y, et al. Detection of bladder cancer using a point-of-care proteomic assay. JAMA. 2005; 293:810–6.

10. Moonen PM, Kiemeney LA, Witjes JA. Urinary NMP22 BladderChek test in the disgnosis of superficial bladder cancer. Eur Urol. 2005; 48:951–6.

11. Fleming ID, Cooper JS, editors. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 5th ed.New York: Springer;1997.

12. Kim YH, Cho WJ, Hong KS, Koo HS, Shim BS, Kwon SW. Evaluation of the usefulness of immediate-cytospin wright-stained urine cytology in the screeing and monitoring of bladder cancer. Korean J Lab Med. 2003; 23:164–9.

13. Kwon DH, Hong SJ. The clinical utility of BTA TRAK, BTA stat, NMP22 and urine cytology in the diagnosis of bladder cancer: a comparative study. Korean J Urol. 2003; 44:721–6.

14. Park JO, Moon DG, Cheon J, Kim JJ, Yoon DK. Urinary NMP (nuclear matrix protein)22 in screening and post-treatment follow-up of bladder cancer. Korean J Urol. 1999; 40:551–6.

15. Atsu N, Ekici S, Oge O O, Ergen A, Hascelik G, Ozen H. False-positive results of the NMP22 test due to hematuria. J Urol. 2002; 167:555–8.

16. Ponsky LE, Sharma S, Pandrangi L, Kedia S, Nelson D, Agarwal A, et al. Screening and monitoring for bladder cancer: refining the use of NMP22. J Urol. 2001; 166:75–8.

17. Grossman HB, Soloway M, Messing E, Katz G, Stein B, Kassabian V, et al. Surveilance for recurrent bladder cancer using a point-of-care proteomic assay. JAMA. 2006; 295:299–305.