Correlation of Urine Cytology and UroVysion Fluorescent in Situ Hybridization Test in Urothelial Carcinoma Experience of a Single Institution

AbstractContext.—Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) of voided urine sediment is a sensitive and specific test for the detection of urothelial carcinoma. The time required for slide preparation using the conventional cytospin method is lengthy.Objective.—To present an alternative to the conventional cytospin method.Design.—We compared the results of an improved filter monolayer method with published results of the conventional cytospin method. A total of 624 patients with cytology and FISH analyses were followed with cystoscopy and/ or bladder biopsy. Fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis was performed on 624 cases using fluorescence-labeled probes to the pericentromeric regions of chromosomes 3, 7, and 17 and band 9p21; cytology was also performed in all cases.Results.—A total of 217 (34.7%) of 624 patients had follow-up bladder biopsies, and 170 of these (78.3%) had urothelial carcinoma. The sensitivity for cancer detection was higher for FISH than for urine cytology (92.9% [158/ 170] for FISH vs 72.9% [124/170] for urine cytology, P = <5%). The specificity was equivalent for FISH and urine cytology (97.5% [443/454] for FISH vs 92.2% [419/454] for cytology). The sensitivity for FISH was better (92.9% vs 81%), and there was no significant difference in specificity (97.5% vs 96%) between the filter method and the conventional cytospin method. Unlike the conventional cytospin method, the filter method did not require multiple centrifugation and decantation steps or investment in dedicated equipment.Conclusions.—The improved filter method was faster, easier, and less expensive than published results with the conventional cytospin method with better sensitivity and equivalent specificity.

Download Full-text

The p16-Ki-67-HMB45 Immunohistochemistry Scoring System is Highly Concordant With the Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization Test to Differentiate Between Melanocytic Nevi and Melanomas

Applied Immunohistochemistry & Molecular Morphology ◽

10.1097/pai.0000000000000428 ◽

2016 ◽

pp. 1

Author(s):

Arnaud Uguen ◽

Marie Uguen ◽

Briac Guibourg ◽

Matthieu Talagas ◽

Pascale Marcorelles ◽

...

Keyword(s):

In Situ Hybridization ◽

Scoring System ◽

Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization ◽

Ki 67 ◽

Melanocytic Nevi ◽

Hybridization Test

Download Full-text

Faculty Opinions recommendation of The p16-Ki-67-HMB45 Immunohistochemistry Scoring System is Highly Concordant With the Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization Test to Differentiate Between Melanocytic Nevi and Melanomas.

Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature ◽

10.3410/f.726609945.793560888 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Christine Ko

Keyword(s):

In Situ Hybridization ◽

Scoring System ◽

Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization ◽

Ki 67 ◽

Melanocytic Nevi ◽

Hybridization Test

Download Full-text

Adaptation of a commercial fluorescent in situ hybridization test to the diagnosis of malignant cells in effusions

Lung Cancer ◽

10.1016/j.lungcan.2009.05.004 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 68 (1) ◽

pp. 39-43 ◽

Cited By ~ 47

Author(s):

Carmen Flores-Staino ◽

Eva Darai-Ramqvist ◽

Katalin Dobra ◽

Anders Hjerpe

Keyword(s):

In Situ Hybridization ◽

Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization ◽

Malignant Cells ◽

Hybridization Test

Download Full-text

POD-09.04: A comparison of specificity of urine cytology, urinary nuclear matrix protein 22 [NMP22] and multi-target fluorescent in situ hybridization [FISH] assay in bladder cancer patients with no recurrence at surveillance

Urology ◽

10.1016/j.urology.2007.06.110 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 70 (3) ◽

pp. 28-29

Author(s):

E.O. Kehinde ◽

F. Al-Mulla ◽

S. Jacob ◽

K. Kapila ◽

J.T. Anim ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Bladder Cancer ◽

In Situ Hybridization ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Nuclear Matrix ◽

Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization ◽

Matrix Protein ◽

Urine Cytology ◽

Nuclear Matrix Protein

Download Full-text

Diagnostic value comparison of CellDetect, fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH), and cytology in urothelial carcinoma

Cancer Cell International ◽

10.1186/s12935-021-02169-3 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Donghao Shang ◽

Yuting Liu ◽

Xiuhong Xu ◽

Zhenghao Chen ◽

Daye Wang

Keyword(s):

Bladder Cancer ◽

In Situ Hybridization ◽

Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization ◽

Urine Cytology ◽

Low Grade ◽

High Grade ◽

Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Muscle Invasive

Abstract Background To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of a novel CellDetect staining technique, compared with fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH), and urine cytology, in the diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma (UC). Methods A total of 264 patients with suspicious UC were enrolled in this study. All tissue specimens were collected by biopsy or surgery. Urine specimen was obtained for examinations prior to the surgical procedure. CellDetect staining was carried out with CellDetect kit, and FISH was performed with UroVysion detection kit, according to the manufacturer’s instructions. For urine cytology, all specimens were centrifuged using the cytospin method, and the slides were stained by standard Papanicolaou stain. Results In this study, there were 128 cases of UC and 136 cases of non-UC, with no significant difference in gender and age between the two groups. Results for sensitivity of CellDetect, FISH, and urine cytology were 82.8%, 83.6%, and 39.8%, respectively. The specificity of the three techniques were 88.2%, 90.4%, and 86.0%, respectively. The sensitivity of CellDetect and FISH are significantly superior compared to the conventional urine cytology; however, there was no significant difference in specificity among three staining techniques. In addition, the sensitivity of CellDetect in lower urinary tract UC, upper urinary tract UC, non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), and muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) were 83.3%, 81.8%, 83.5%, and 72.0%, respectively. The screening ability of CellDetect has no correlation with tumor location and the tumor stage. The sensitivity of CellDetect in low-grade UC and high-grade UC were 51.6 and 92.8%. Thus, screening ability of CellDetect in high-grade UC is significantly superior compared to that in low-grade UC. Conclusions CellDetect and FISH show equal value in diagnosing UC, both are superior to conventional urine cytology. Compared to FISH, CellDetect is cost effective, easy to operate, with extensive clinical application value to monitor recurrence of UC, and to screen indetectable UC.

Download Full-text

The Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization Test in Comparison with Culture for Detection of Legionella pneumophila in Water Samples

Legionella ◽

10.1128/9781555817985.ch51 ◽

2014 ◽

pp. 263-266 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Bart Wullings ◽

Remko Voogt ◽

Harm Veenendaal ◽

Dick van der Kooij

Keyword(s):

In Situ Hybridization ◽

Legionella Pneumophila ◽

Water Samples ◽

Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization ◽

Hybridization Test

Download Full-text

Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization as an Ancillary Tool in Urine Cytology to Diagnose Urothelial Carcinoma

Pathology Case Reviews ◽

10.1097/00132583-200203000-00005 ◽

2002 ◽

Vol 7 (2) ◽

pp. 70-74 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Ravindra Veeramachaneni ◽

Mary L. Nordberg ◽

Elba A. Turbat-Herrera ◽

Guillermo A. Herrera

Keyword(s):

In Situ Hybridization ◽

Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization ◽

Urothelial Carcinoma ◽

Urine Cytology

Download Full-text

Single Institution Study of Abnormalities Involving Chromosomes 13 and 17 Detected by Classical Cytogenetics and Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization in Myeloma and Their Relationship to Survival in Patients Undergoing Autologous Stem Cell Transplant.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v108.11.5072.5072 ◽

2006 ◽

Vol 108 (11) ◽

pp. 5072-5072

Author(s):

Arun Rajan ◽

Constance Stein ◽

Teresa Gentile ◽

Chirag Shah

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Stem Cell ◽

In Situ Hybridization ◽

Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization ◽

Single Institution ◽

Conventional Cytogenetics ◽

Normal Fish ◽

Normal Cytogenetics ◽

Classical Cytogenetics

Abstract Multiple myeloma is associated with a variety of chromosomal anomalies each of which may affect survival to varying degrees. Recent data indicate that patients with chromosome 13 and 17 anomalies have a poor prognosis. In the current single institution study we analyzed the presence of anomalies involving chromosomes 13 and 17 detected by classical cytogenetics (karyotype analysis) (CC) and interphase fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) in patients who underwent autologous stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma and correlated this with mean survival. Our patients had undergone autologous stem cell transplantation between April 1998 and March 2006. Of the 79 patients studied, data on CC and FISH was available on 43 patients and 29 patients respectively. 34 of 43 patients had normal CC and 11 of 29 patients had normal FISH. The mean survival of patients with normal cytogenetics was 45.36 months and for those with a normal FISH result it was 50 months. 9 of 43 patients had an abnormal CC result and 18 of 29 patients had an abnormal FISH result. Mean survival with an abnormal CC result was 30.40 months compared to 40.83 months with an abnormal FISH result. Anomalies of chromosomes 13 and/or 17 were seen in 6 of 9 patients by CC and 15 of 18 patients by FISH. Mean survival in these two groups was 30.25 months and 42.80 months respectively. These results indicate that normal cytogenetics and fluorescent in situ hybridization results at the time of diagnosis are associated with favorable outcome. The presence of abnormalities detected by conventional cytogenetics is associated with poorer outcome, particularly for deletion 13q and deletion 17p. Patients with interphase FISH abnormalities for chromosomes 13 and 17 have better survival than those with abnormalities for these chromosomes detected by conventional cytogenetics. Abnormalities in conventional cytogenetics may suggest actively proliferating disease. Thus interphase FISH should not substitute for conventional cytogenetic analysis in the diagnosis of myeloma.

Download Full-text