#PAGE_PARAMS# #ADS_HEAD_SCRIPTS# #MICRODATA#
CS
proLékaře.cz / Journals / Czech Urology / 2025 - 2

Non-invasive urinary biomarkers in the diagnosis and monitoring of bladder cancer

Czech version

Authors: Barbora Žemličková 1;  Antonín Brisuda 2
Authors‘ workplace: Urologické oddělení, Klaudiánova nemocnice, Oblastní nemocnice Mladá Boleslav, a. s., nemocnice Středočeského kraje 1;  Urologická klinika 2. LF UK a FN Motol, Praha 2
Published in: Ces Urol 2025; 29(2): 76-85
Category: Review article
doi: https://doi.org/10.48095/cccu2025011

Overview

Non-invasive urinary biomarkers represent a promising alternative to current diagnostic methods for bladder cancer. This study aims to present the main available biomarkers, evaluate their benefits, and assess their potential use in diagnosis and patient monitoring.

Bladder tumors are a common disease worldwide. They are often recurrent tumors requiring long-term monitoring, making them highly prevalent. The primary diagnostic method is cystoscopy, which is also essential for follow-up. In both cases – diagnosis and surveillance – an invasive method is used, carrying a significant risk of complications. The only recommended non-invasive examination is urine cytology.

The limitations of cystoscopy and urine cytology drive research into various non-invasive urinary biomarkers to find a test that is sufficiently sensitive and specific for use not only in diagnosing but also in monitoring bladder tumors. Several biomarkers associated with bladder cancer have already been introduced to the market. This article presents the main representatives of non-invasive biomarkers and their potential applications.

Keywords:

bladder cancer – non-invasive diagnosis – non-invasive biomarker

Sources
  1. Lotan Y, Gakis G, Manfredi M et al. Alternating cystoscopy with Bladder EpiCheck® in the surveillance of low-grade intermediate-risk NMIBC: a cost comparison model. Bladder Cancer 2021; 7(3): 307–315. doi: 10.3233/BLC-211528.
  2. van Rhijn BW, Burger M, Lotan Y et al. Recurrence and progression of disease in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: from epidemiology to treatment strategy. Eur Urol 2009; 56(3): 430–442. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.06.028.
  3. Kamat AM, Dickstein RJ, Messetti F et al. Use of fluorescence in situ hybridization to predict response to bacillus Calmette-Guérin therapy for bladder cancer: results of a prospective trial. J Urol 2012; 187(3): 862–867. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.10.144.
  4. Gontero P et al. EAU Guidelines on non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. In: 38th EAU Annual Congress Paris 2024.
  5. Daneshmand S, Bazargani ST, Bivalacqua TJ et al. Blue light cystoscopy for the diagnosis of bladder cancer: results from the US prospective multicenter registry. Urol Oncol 2018; 36(8): 361.e1–361.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.04.013.
  6. Devlies W, de Jong JJ, Hofmann F et al. The diagnostic accuracy of cystoscopy for detecting bladder cancer in adults presenting with haematuria: a systematic review from the European Association of Urology Guidelines Office. Eur Urol Focus 2024; 10(1): 115–122. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2023.08.002.
  7. Russo GI, Sholklapper TN, Cocci A et al. Performance of narrow band imaging (NBI) and photodynamic diagnosis (PDD) fluorescence imaging compared to white light cystoscopy (WLC) in detecting non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and lesion-level diagnostic meta-analysis. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13(17): 4378. doi: 10.3390/cancers13174378.
  8. Rink M, Babjuk M, Catto JW et al. Hexyl aminolevulinate-guided fluorescence cystoscopy in the diagnosis and follow-up of patients with non- -muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a critical review of the current literature. Eur Urol 2013; 64(4): 624–638. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.07.007.
  9. Heer R, Lewis R, Vadiveloo T et al. A randomized trial of photodynamic surgery in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. NEJM Evid 2022; 1(10): EVIDoa2200092. doi: 10.1056/EVIDoa2200092.
  10. Ferro M, Falagario UG, Barone B et al. Artificial intelligence in the advanced diagnosis of bladder cancer: comprehensive literature review and future advancement. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13(13): 2308. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13132308.
  11. Wojcik EM, Kurtycz DFI, Rosenthal DL (eds). The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. 2nd ed. Springer 2022.
  12. Tian W, Shore KT, Shah RB. Significant reduction of indeterminate (atypical) diagnosis after implementation of The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology: a single-institution study of more than 27,000 cases. Cancer Cytopathol 2021; 129(2): 114–120. doi: 10.1002/cncy.22349.
  13. Freifeld Y, Lotan Y. Effect of blue-light cystoscopy on contemporary performance of urine cytology. BJU Int 2019; 124(2): 251–257. doi: 10.1111/ bju.14574.
  14. Yafi FA, Brimo F, Steinberg J et al. Prospective analysis of sensitivity and specificity of urinary cytology and other urinary biomarkers for bladder cancer. Urol Oncol 2015; 33(2): 66.e25–66.e31. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2014.06.008.
  15. Sanghvi AB, Allen EZ, Callenberg KM et al. Performance of an artificial intelligence algorithm for reporting urine cytopathology. Cancer Cytopathol 2019; 127(10): 658–666. doi: 10.1002/cncy.22176.
  16. Soria F, Droller MJ, Lotan Y et al. An up-to-date catalog of available urinary biomarkers for the surveillance of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. World J Urol 2018; 36(12): 1981–1995. doi: 10.1007/s00345-018-2380-x.
  17. Brisuda A. Neinvazivní diagnostika a intravezikální léčba nádorů močového měchýře [habilitační práce]. Praha: Univerzita Karlova, 2. lékařská fakulta, Urologická klinika 2. LF UK a FN Motol 2022.
  18. Murphy WM, Rivera-Ramirez I, Medina CA et al. The bladder tumor antigen (BTA) test compared to voided urine cytology in the detection of bladder neoplasms. J Urol 1997; 158(6): 2102–2106. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(01)68167-9.
  19. Ng K, Stenzl A, Sharma A et al. Urinary biomarkers in bladder cancer: a review of the current landscape and future directions. Urol Oncol 2021; 39(1): 41–51. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.08.016.
  20. Gutiérrez Baños JL, Rebollo Rodrigo MH et al. NMP 22, BTA stat test and cytology in the diagnosis of bladder cancer: a comparative study. Urol Int 2001; 66(4): 185–190. doi: 10.1159/000056612.
  21. Leyh H, Marberger M, Conort P et al. Comparison of the BTA stat test with voided urine cytology and bladder wash cytology in the diagnosis and monitoring of bladder cancer. Eur Urol 1999; 35(1): 52–56. doi: 10.1159/000019819.
  22. Babjuk M, Soukup V, Pesl M et al. Urinary cytology and quantitative BTA and UBC tests in surveillance of patients with pTa-pT1 bladder urothelial carcinoma. Urology 2008; 71(4): 718–722. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.12.021.
  23. Raitanen MP; FinnBladder Group. The role of BTA stat test in follow-up of patients with bladder cancer: results from FinnBladder studies. World J Urol 2008; 26(1): 45–50. doi: 10.1007/s00345-007-0230-3.
  24. Lokeshwar VB, Schroeder GL, Selzer MG et al. Bladder tumor markers for monitoring recurrence and screening: comparison of hyaluronic acid-hyaluronidase and BTA-Stat tests. Cancer 2002; 95(1): 61–72. doi: 10.1002/cncr.10652.
  25. Mbeutcha A, Lucca I, Mathieu R et al. Current status of urinary biomarkers for detection and surveillance of bladder cancer. Urol Clin North Am 2016; 43(1): 47–62. doi: 10.1016/j.ucl.2015.08.005.
  26. Mowatt G, Zhu S, Kilonzo M et al. Systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of photodynamic diagnosis and urine biomarkers (FISH, ImmunoCyt, NMP22) and cytology for the detection and follow-up of bladder cancer. Health Technol Assess 2010; 14(4): 1–331. doi: 10.3310/hta14040.
  27. Todenhöfer T, Hennenlotter J, Kühs U et al. Influence of urinary tract instrumentation and inflammation on the performance of urine markers for the detection of bladder cancer. Urology 2012; 79(3): 620–624. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.10.067.
  28. Sarosdy MF, deVere White RW, Soloway MS et al. Results of a multicenter trial using the BTA test to monitor for and diagnose recurrent bladder cancer. J Urol 1995; 154(2 Pt 1): 379–383. doi: 10.1097/00005392-199508000-00013.
  29. Gontero P, Montanari E, Roupret M et al. Comparison of the performances of the ADXBLADDER test and urinary cytology in the follow-up of non- -muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a blinded prospective multicentric study. BJU Int 2021; 127(2): 198–204. doi: 10.1111/bju.15194.
  30. Dudderidge T, Stockley J, Nabi G et al. A novel, non-invasive test enabling bladder cancer detection in urine sediment of patients presenting with haematuria – a prospective multicentre performance evaluation of ADXBLADDER. Eur Urol Oncol 2020; 3(1): 42–46. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.06.006.
  31. Roupret M, Gontero P, McCracken SRC et al. Diagnostic accuracy of MCM5 for the detection of recurrence in nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer follow-up: a blinded, prospective cohort, multicenter European study. J Urol 2020; 204(4): 685–690. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001084.
  32. Têtu B, Tiguert R, Harel F et al. ImmunoCyt/uCyt+ improves the sensitivity of urine cytology in patients followed for urothelial carcinoma. Mod Pathol 2005; 18(1): 83–89. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.3800262.
  1. O'Sullivan P, Sharples K, Dalphin M et al. A multigene urine test for the detection and stratification of bladder cancer in patients presenting with hematuria. J Urol 2012; 188(3): 741–747. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.05.003.
  2. Harvey JC, Cambridge LM, Ellen CW et al. Analytical validation of Cxbladder® Detect, Triage, and Monitor: assays for detection and management of urothelial carcinoma. Diagnostics 2024; 14(18): 2061. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics14182061.
  3. Raman JD, Kavalieris L, Konety B et al. 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. J Urol 2021; 206(6): 1380–1389. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000002135.
  4. Lotan Y, O’Sullivan P, Raman JD et al. Clinical comparison of noninvasive urine tests for ruling out recurrent urothelial carcinoma. Urol Oncol 2017; 35(8): 531.e15–531.e22. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2017.03.008.
  5. Kavalieris L, O'Sullivan P, Frampton C et al. Performance characteristics of a multigene urine biomarker test for monitoring for recurrent urothelial carcinoma in a multicenter study. J Urol 2017; 197(6): 1419–1426. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.12.010.
  6. Valenberg FJPV, Hiar AM, Wallace E et al. Validation of an mRNA-based urine test for the detection of bladder cancer in patients with haematuria. Eur Urol Oncol 2021; 4(1): 93–101. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2020.09.001.
  7. Cancel-Tassin G, Roupret M, Pinar U et al. Assessment of Xpert Bladder Cancer Monitor test performance for the detection of recurrence during non-muscle invasive bladder cancer follow-up. World J Urol 2021; 39(9): 3329–3335. doi: 10.1007/s00345-021-03629-1.
  8. Elsawy AA, Awadalla A, Abdullateef M et al. Can repeat biopsy be skipped after initial complete resection of T1 bladder cancer? The role of a novel urinary mRNA biomarker. Urol Oncol 2021; 39(7): 437.e11–437.e19. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.02.009.
  9. Trenti E, Pycha S, Mian C et al. Comparison of 2 new real-time polymerase chain reaction-based urinary markers in the follow-up of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Cancer Cytopathol 2020; 128(5): 341–347. doi: 10.1002/cncy.22246.
  10. Cepheid. Xpert® Urine Transport Reagent Kit [online]. Dostupné z: https://web-support.cepheid.com/MSDS-IFUs%20%28Specimen%20Collection%20Kits%29/Xpert%20Urine%20Transport%20Reagent%20Kit%20302-6829/Xpert%20Urine%20Transport%20Reagent%20Kit%20302 6829-CS%20Rev.%20A%20%C4%8CE%C5%A0TINA.pdf
  11. Hofbauer SL, de Martino M, Lucca I et al. A urinary microRNA (miR) signature for diagnosis of bladder cancer. Urol Oncol 2018; 36(12): 531.e1–531. e8. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.09.006.
  12. Tomiyama E, Fujita K, Hashimoto M et al. Urinary markers for bladder cancer diagnosis: a review of current status and future challenges. Int J Urol 2024; 31(3): 208–219. doi: 10.1111/iju.15338.
  13. Witjes JA, Morote J, Cornel EB et al. Performance of the Bladder EpiCheck™ methylation test for patients under surveillance for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: results of a multicenter, prospective, blinded clinical trial. Eur Urol Oncol 2018; 1(4): 307–313. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.06.011.
  14. Laukhtina E, Shim SR, Mori K et al. Corrigendum to "Diagnostic accuracy of novel urinary biomarker tests in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis" [Eur Urol Oncol 2021; 4: 927–942]. Eur Urol Oncol 2022; 5(4): 480–481. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2022.01.003.
  15. D'Andrea D, Soria F, Zehetmayer S et al. Diagnostic accuracy, clinical utility and influence on decision-making of a methylation urine biomarker test in the surveillance of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. BJU Int 2019; 123(6): 959–967. doi: 10.1111/bju.14673.
  16. Trenti E, D'Elia C, Mian C et al. Diagnostic predictive value of the Bladder EpiCheck test in the follow-up of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Cancer Cytopathol 2019; 127(7): 465–469. doi: 10.1002/cncy.22152.
  17. Kravchuk AP, Wolff I, Gilfrich C et al. Urine-based biomarker test Uromonitor® in the detection and disease monitoring of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer – a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test performance. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16(4): 753. doi: 10.3390/cancers16040753.
  18. Wang G, Jin W, Xu Z et al. Urine-based liquid biopsy in bladder cancer: opportunities and challenges. Clin Transl Disc 2023; 3(1): e176. doi: 10.1002/ ctd2.176.
  19. Batista R, Vinagre J, Prazeres H et al. Validation of a novel, sensitive, and specific urine-based test for recurrence surveillance of patients with non- -muscle-invasive bladder cancer in a comprehensive multicenter study. Front Genet 2019; 10: 1237. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2019.01237.
  20. Azawi N, Vásquez JL, Dreyer T et al. Surveillance of low-grade non-muscle invasive bladder tumors using Uromonitor: SOLUSION trial. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15(8): 2341. doi: 10.3390/cancers15082341.
  21. Ramos P, Brás JP, Dias C et al. Uromonitor®: clinical validation and performance assessment of a urinary biomarker for recurrence surveillance in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer patients. medRxiv 2024. doi: 10.1101/2023.11.02.23297958.
  22. Roobol MJ, Bangma CH, el Bouazzaoui S et al. Feasibility study of screening for bladder cancer with urinary molecular markers (the BLU-P project). Urol Oncol 2010; 28(6): 686–690. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2009.12.002.
  23. Grossman HB, Messing E, Soloway M et al. Detection of bladder cancer using a point-of-care proteomic assay. JAMA 2005; 293(7): 810–816. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.7.810.
  24. Starke N, Singla N, Haddad A et al. Long-term outcomes in a high-risk bladder cancer screening cohort. BJU Int 2016; 117(4): 611–617. doi: 10.1111/bju.13154.
  25. Laukhtina E, Shim SR, Mori K et al. Diagnostic accuracy of novel urinary biomarker tests in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol 2021; 4(6): 927–942. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.10.003.
  26. Barocas DA, Boorjian SA, Alvarez RD et al. Microhematuria: AUA/SUFU Guideline. J Urol 2020; 204(4): 778–786. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001297.
  27. de Jong JJ, Pijpers OM, van Kessel KEM et al. A urine-based genomic assay improves risk stratification for patients with high-risk hematuria stratified according to the American Urological Association guidelines. Eur Urol Oncol 2023; 6(2): 183–189. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2022.08.002.
  28. Elsawy AA, Awadalla A, Abdullateef M et al. Can repeat biopsy be skipped after initial complete resection of T1 bladder cancer? The role of a novel urinary mRNA biomarker. Urol Oncol 2021; 39(7): 437.e11–437.e19. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.02.009.
  29. Todenhöfer T, Hennenlotter J, Guttenberg P et al. Prognostic relevance of positive urine markers in patients with negative cystoscopy during surveillance of bladder cancer. BMC Cancer 2015; 15: 155. doi: 10.1186/s12885-015-1089-0.
  30. Critelli R, Fasanelli F, Oderda M et al. Detection of multiple mutations in urinary exfoliated cells from male bladder cancer patients at diagnosis and during follow-up. Oncotarget 2016; 7(41): 67435–67448. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.11883.
  31. Beukers W, van der Keur KA, Kandimalla R et al. FGFR3, TERT and OTX1 as a urinary biomarker combination for surveillance of patients with bladder cancer in a large prospective multicenter study. J Urol 2017; 197(6): 1410–1418. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.12.096.
  32. Lotan Y, Bensalah K, Ruddell T et al. Prospective evaluation of the clinical usefulness of reflex fluorescence in situ hybridization assay in patients with atypical cytology for the detection of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. J Urol 2008; 179(6): 2164–2169. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.01.105.
  33. Schmitz-Dräger BJ, Droller M, Lokeshwar VB et al. Molecular markers for bladder cancer screening, early diagnosis, and surveillance: the WHO/ ICUD consensus. Urol Int 2015; 94(1): 1–24. doi: 10.1159/000369357.
Labels
Paediatric urologist Nephrology Urology
Editorial
Minimally invasive ureterolysis in retroperitoneal fibrosis (Ormond´s disease) – video
Adrenocortical carcinoma – a review of current knowledge for Czech urological practice
Male infertility in Czech urological practice – current diagnostic and therapeutic trends
Robot-assisted vs. open partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma – functional and oncological outcomes according to RENAL nephrometric score
Fournier´s gangrene of the penis – reconstruction using full-thickness skin graft
Innovative pharmacological form of treatment for erectile dysfunction – sildenafil in an orally dissolvable film
Report from the 36th meeting of the Pediatric section of the Czech Urological Society ČLS JEP
From urology to koalas – experience from USANZ Trainee Week thanks to the EUREP program
Article was published in

Czech Urology

Issue 2
2025 Issue 2
Download issue PDF
Most read in this issue
Topics Journals
Login
Forgotten password

Enter the email address that you registered with. We will send you instructions on how to set a new password.

Login

Don‘t have an account?  Create new account

#ADS_BOTTOM_SCRIPTS#