Diagnostic accuracy of urinary aquaporin-1 as a biomarker for renal cell carcinoma.
Journal
Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India
ISSN: 0970-1591
Titre abrégé: Indian J Urol
Pays: India
ID NLM: 8510441
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
08
06
2020
revised:
22
07
2020
accepted:
23
08
2020
entrez:
14
4
2021
pubmed:
15
4
2021
medline:
15
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Optimal patient selection plays a vital role in management of renal tumors with the introduction of nephron-sparing approaches and active surveillance. A reliable and accurate diagnostic biomarker will be a useful adjunct to decision-making. We studied the diagnostic accuracy of urinary aquaporin-1 (uAQP-1), an upcoming urinary biomarker, for renal cell carcinoma. In this prospective biomarker study, urine samples were obtained preoperatively from 36 patients with an imaged renal mass suggestive of RCC and 24 healthy age-matched controls, chosen from among voluntary kidney donors. uAQP-1 concentrations were estimated with a sensitive and specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and normalized by estimation of urinary creatinine. The Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare differences between any two groups. A receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted to analyze the diagnostic accuracy of uAQP-1 for RCC. The median uAQP-1 concentration among the cases and controls was 8.78 ng/mg creatinine (interquartile range [IQR]: 5.56-12.67) and 9.52 ng/mg creatinine (IQR: 5.55-12.45), respectively. There was no significant difference in uAQP-1 concentrations between the two groups. ROC analysis showed that, for a cutoff value of 8 ng/mg creatinine, the sensitivity and specificity of uAQP-1 as a diagnostic test were 47.2% and 66.7%, respectively, and area under the curve was 0.52 (95% confidence interval: 0.42-0.62). uAQP-1 concentrations did not discriminate between healthy individuals and patients with RCC. The results of this study suggest that uAQP-1 may not be a suitable diagnostic biomarker for RCC in the study population.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33850357
doi: 10.4103/iju.IJU_330_20
pii: IJU-37-59
pmc: PMC8033244
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
59-64Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2021 Indian Journal of Urology.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of Interest: There are no conflicts of interest.
Références
Int J Mol Sci. 2017 Jan 29;18(2):
pubmed: 28146084
Rev Urol. 2012;14(1-2):13-9
pubmed: 23172995
Mol Clin Oncol. 2013 Nov;1(6):953-958
pubmed: 24649276
J Cancer Res Ther. 2012 Oct-Dec;8(4):571-7
pubmed: 23361277
J Pathol Transl Med. 2016 Jul;50(4):251-7
pubmed: 27271108
Urology. 2014 Jan;83(1):256.e9-14
pubmed: 24239027
Mayo Clin Proc. 2015 Jan;90(1):35-42
pubmed: 25572193
Kidney Int. 2006 Apr;69(8):1471-6
pubmed: 16501490
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Oct;197(4):887-96
pubmed: 21940576
Clin Chem. 2005 Aug;51(8):1335-41
pubmed: 15961549
Urology. 1998 Feb;51(2):203-5
pubmed: 9495698
Mayo Clin Proc. 2010 May;85(5):413-21
pubmed: 20375178
Ann Surg Oncol. 2012 Jul;19(7):2380-7
pubmed: 22322956
Interface Focus. 2018 Jun 6;8(3):20170066
pubmed: 29696094
Eur Urol. 2009 Oct;56(4):690-8
pubmed: 18930582
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001 Jul 18;93(14):1054-61
pubmed: 11459866
Urology. 2000 Jul;56(1):58-62
pubmed: 10869624
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003 May;180(5):1271-7
pubmed: 12704036
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010 Apr;19(4):953-9
pubmed: 20332277
JAMA Oncol. 2015 May;1(2):204-12
pubmed: 26181025
Vojnosanit Pregl. 2016 Mar;73(3):266-72
pubmed: 27295912