Cargando…
The Diagnostic Performance of Cxbladder Resolve, Alone and in Combination with Other Cxbladder Tests, in the Identification and Priority Evaluation of Patients at Risk for Urothelial Carcinoma
Cxbladder (Cxb) tests combine genomic biomarkers in urine with phenotypic and clinical data to classify hematuria patients into those at low/high probability of urothelial carcinoma (UC). Cxbladder Resolve (CxbR) is designed for use after Cxb Triage (CxbT) and Detect (CxbD), where CxbT-positive test...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8584223/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34348469 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002135 |
Sumario: | Cxbladder (Cxb) tests combine genomic biomarkers in urine with phenotypic and clinical data to classify hematuria patients into those at low/high probability of urothelial carcinoma (UC). Cxbladder Resolve (CxbR) is designed for use after Cxb Triage (CxbT) and Detect (CxbD), where CxbT-positive tests reflex to CxbD and CxbD-positive to CxbR to identify patients at high probability of high-impact tumors (HIT; high grade Ta, Tis or T1–T3). This study validated the diagnostic performance of CxbR in identifying HIT, and validated the algorithm of Cxb tests to segregate high-impact from low-impact tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CxbR was developed in 863 hematuria patients in 3 studies in United States, Australia and New Zealand. CxbR, separately and combined with other Cxb tests, was validated in a prospective, observational U.S. study in 548 hematuria patients. All UC diagnoses were confirmed by histopathology. RESULTS: In the development data set, CxbR sensitivity was 92.4% (95% CI 83.3–96.7) and specificity 93.8% (95% CI 86.8–97.2) for identifying HIT within the high priority category. During external validation, sequential Cxb tests correctly ruled out 87.6% of patients from further workup (negative predictive value 99.4%); 100% of HIT were correctly identified (specificity 96.3%), and 3 low-grade tumors were missed. In both studies, all patients with HIT were correctly assigned to prioritized evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: CxbR has high sensitivity and specificity, correctly identifying all HIT. Sequential Cxb tests accurately segregate patients with a low vs high probability of HIT, focusing resources on those patients, with a diagnostic yield 4.8-fold higher than American Urological Association guideline stratification. |
---|