2001
DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(05)65848-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Telomerase Activity and Cytokeratin 20 as Markers for the Detection and Followup of Transitional Cell Carcinoma: An Unfulfilled Promise

Abstract: Telomerase activity and cytokeratin 20 expression are not specific for malignancy and may be detected in many nonmalignant pathological conditions. Therefore, their use as potential markers of bladder carcinoma should be carefully reevaluated.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
15
0
2

Year Published

2002
2002
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
15
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…These results are in accord with the fi ndings that this antigen used to be expressed in tumours of epithelial origin with the exception of cervical carcinomas, renal carcinomas, prostate and colon carcinomas (8,9). Cytokeratin 20 was reported to occur in 70-80 % of transitional cell carcinomas (6). In accord with this, we have not found this antigen in 6 out 17 low differentiated carcinomas and in 2 out 12 papillary carcinomas (regardless of the grade of dysplasia), which means 27.5 % of negative UCs.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…These results are in accord with the fi ndings that this antigen used to be expressed in tumours of epithelial origin with the exception of cervical carcinomas, renal carcinomas, prostate and colon carcinomas (8,9). Cytokeratin 20 was reported to occur in 70-80 % of transitional cell carcinomas (6). In accord with this, we have not found this antigen in 6 out 17 low differentiated carcinomas and in 2 out 12 papillary carcinomas (regardless of the grade of dysplasia), which means 27.5 % of negative UCs.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…Despite promising preliminary results, diagnostic tests such as telomerase activity detection or cytokeratin 20 have shown to be technically complicated, and their mean sensitivity is no higher than that of urinary cytology (Ramakumar et al, 1999). Moreover, these tests are not specific for malignancy (Cassel et al, 2001;Konety and Getzenberg, 2001). Other assays such as Bard BTA Stat test and NMP22 assay have shown a 67% and 70% sensitivity, respectively, with approximately 70% specificity for both tests (Giannopoulos et al, 2001;Sarosdy et al, 1997).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This opinion, ®rst postulated by us as early as 1996 (MuÈ ller et al, 1996) and thereafter controversially discussed in the literature, has, in the meantime, been generally accepted (Arai et al, 2000;Cassel et al, 2001;de Kok et al, 2000a;Wu et al, 2000). Furthermore, the TRAP-assay, despite the assertions of certain authors (Gelmini et al, 2000), is not truly quantitative, but only semiquantitative at best (Yokota et al, 1998) Due to the instability of the enzyme in urine samples and the resulting poor sensitivity of the detection of telomerase activity, alternatives to the TRAP-assay were sought.…”
Section: Urine Samplesmentioning
confidence: 97%