Evaluation of fluorescence in situ hybridization as an ancillary tool to urine cytology in diagnosing urothelial carcinoma

• DOI: 10.1002/dc.10291
• Publication Date: 2003-05-21T22:00:53Z
• Authors: Ravindra Veeramac...; Mary L. Nordberg; Runhua Shi; Guillermo A. Herrera; Elba A. Turbat‐He...
• Keywords: Urine cytology; Carcinoma in situ

Our purpose was to evaluate the feasibility of performing fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) on routine urine samples and compare relative sensitivities cytology FISH for detecting urothelial carcinoma. Light microscopy (LM) using cytologic evaluation were used study 121 consecutive samples. A mixture fluorescent probes chromosomes 3, 7, 17, 9p21 locus detection numerical chromosomal abnormalities (UroVysion, Vysis/Abbott). Biopsy specimens from patients reviewed if available. analysis performed without knowledge or biopsy findings. The interpreted as 59 negative, 41 reactive, 16 atypical, 2 suspicious 3 insufficient cells diagnosis. 85 successfully analyzed by FISH. Thirty-one these showed initially regarded original reading follows: 10 9 suspicious. demonstrated a significant number cases (67%) that diagnosed normal reactive LM. Twenty-five identified who had biopsy-proven TCC successful Thirteen 25 (52%) abnormal (cytology: suspicious, 6 4 1 negative). One patient atypical with results but biopsy. Hyperdiploidy (77%) 7 seen consistently. Multiple 67% cases. We conclude has greater sensitivity carcinoma when coupled cytology. It is not entirely clear at this time whether positive may indicate frank neoplastic transformation merely be an indicator unstable urothelium capable primed malignant thus risk. use conjunction can potentially reduce morbidity mortality diagnosing tumors earlier.