Objective: To compare the Bard® BTA® (bladder tumour antigen) test with voided urine cytology (VUC) in the diagnosis of recurrent bladder cancer(BC). Methods: Urine specimens for the BTA test and VUC were collected on the same day as before cystoscopy from patients undergoing routine surveillance cystoscopy for recurrent BC. The pathologists performing VUC were blinded to the results of the BTA test. Results: BC was identified by cystoscopy and biopsy in 39 of 164 study participants. The overall sensitivities of the BTA test and VUC were 54 and 28%, respectively (p < 0.05). The BTA test was more sensitive than VUC for all tumour stages and grades. For ≥T(2)tumours and grade 3 tumours, respectively, the difference was statistically significant(p < 0.05). The specificities of the BTA test and VUC were 92 and 97%, respectively. Both a false-positive BTA test and VUC were found to predict recurrence. Conclusion: The BTA test is equal or superior to VUC in the detection of BC in patients undergoing routine surveillance for recurrent BC.

Keywords:
Bladder cancer, Cytology, Cystoscopy
This content is only available via PDF.
1997
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.