[Detection of bladder cancer by FISH test: a meta-analysis].
OBJECTIVE
To compare the diagnostic value of fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) and traditional cytology in detection of bladder cancer, and to evaluate if FISH test is superior to cytologic examination in this respect.


METHODS
The electronic database of PubMed was searched. Criteria for inclusion and exclusion into the meta-analysis were established. The studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria were selected. Data of these studies were extracted for calculation of pooled odds ratio, likelihood ratio, sensitivity and specificity. Summary receiver operating curve and area under curve (AUC) were produced with Meta-DiSc software.


RESULTS
Fourteen studies were included, and data related to cytologic examination were available in nine of them. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of FISH test were 0.69 (95%CI 0.66 to 0.73) and 0.84 (95%CI 0.81 to 0.86), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of cytology were 0.46 (95%CI 0.42 to 0.51) and 0.88 (95%CI 0.84 to 0.90), respectively. The AUC for FISH and cytology were 0.87 and 0.81, respectively. The difference in AUC between the two tests was not statistically significant (P > 0.05).


CONCLUSIONS
Comparing with traditional cytological examination, FISH test is more sensitive. However, FISH test is still not proven to have better diagnostic value in detection of bladder cancer in both new and follow-up cases. More studies in this area are required for further evaluation.
Zeng
Zheng
Z
Department of Pathology, Nanjing University/Nanjing General Hospital of Nanjing Military Command, People's Liberation Army, China.
Zhou
Xiao-jun
XJ
D019540:Area Under Curve; D003581:Cytodiagnosis; D016206:Databases, Bibliographic; D006801:Humans; D017404:In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D001749:Urinary Bladder Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000473:pathology