|Year : 2008 | Volume
| Issue : 1 | Page : 61-67
Molecular markers in transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: New insights into mechanisms and prognosis
Behfar Ehdaie1, Dan Theodorescu2
1 Department of Urology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
2 Department of Molecular Physiology and Biological Physics, University of Virginia; Mellon Prostate Cancer Institute, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
Department of Urology, Box 422, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, 22908
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
| Abstract|| |
Urothelial carcinoma is potentially life-threatening and expensive to treat since for many patients, the diagnosis entails a lifetime of surveillance to detect recurrent disease. Advancements in technology have provided an understanding of the molecular mechanisms of carcinogenesis and defined distinct pathways in tumorigenesis and progression. At the molecular level, urothelial carcinoma is being seen as a disease with distinct pathways of carcinogenesis and progression and thus markers of these processes should be used as both diagnostics and predictors of progression and patient outcome. Herein we present a selective overview of the molecular underpinning of urothelial carcinogenesis and progression and discuss the potential for proteins involved in these processes to serve as biomarkers. The discovery of biomarkers has enabled the elucidation of targets for novel therapeutic agents to disrupt the deregulation underlying the development and progression of urothelial carcinogenesis.
Keywords: Angiogenesis, biomarkers, bladder cancer, carcinogenesis, cell cycle regulators, loss of heterozygosity, molecular markers, prognosis, urothelial carcinoma
|How to cite this article:|
Ehdaie B, Theodorescu D. Molecular markers in transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: New insights into mechanisms and prognosis. Indian J Urol 2008;24:61-7
|How to cite this URL:|
Ehdaie B, Theodorescu D. Molecular markers in transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: New insights into mechanisms and prognosis. Indian J Urol [serial online] 2008 [cited 2023 Jan 27];24:61-7. Available from: https://www.indianjurol.com/text.asp?2008/24/1/61/38606
| Natural History|| |
Bladder cancer is a common malignancy. Worldwide, it is the seventh most prevalent cancer, accounting for 3.2% of all malignancies.  The highest incidence is seen in industrialized countries and geographic areas where infection with Schistosoma haematobium is endemic.  In the latter case, the tumor is histologically a squamous cell carcinoma while the majority of the others are of urothelial (transitional) histology. Urothelial carcinoma is the focus of this review.
The majority of patients present with papillary non-muscle-invasive (clinical Stage Ta, T1) urothelial cancer.  The natural history of these tumors is significant for local recurrences and relatively infrequent progression to muscle invasion or metastasis.  In contrast, a significant number of patients initially presenting with tumors invading the detrusor muscle have coexistent or develop metastasis during follow-up.  These tumors are thought to arise de novo or evolve from high-grade carcinoma in situ (Tis) and despite radical cystectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy, approximately 50% of patients die within five years of diagnosis.  Given these findings a theory that urothelial carcinomas develop from two distinct oncogenic pathways has been proposed. ,,,
Completion of the Human Genome Project has accelerated the pace at which investigators have identified prognostic molecular markers and elucidated the biochemical signaling pathways in the progression of urothelial carcinoma.  Molecular and cytogenetic data support the clinical impressions outlined above that low-grade tumors and high-grade tumors may represent distinct signaling pathways resulting in the observed clinical behavior. ,,, The first may be characterized by low-grade well-differentiated papillary tumors that infrequently invade the detrusor muscle. The second pathway is characterized by carcinoma in situ and poorly differentiated tumors, including Grade 3 non-muscle-invasive urothelial cancer, with frequent recurrences and progression to detrusor muscle invasion.
At present, the management of urothelial carcinoma is determined by several tumor-specific factors as well as the patient's overall health status. The treatment of patients with non-muscle-invasive papillary tumors includes transurethral resection (TUR) with or without intravesical chemotherapy or immunotherapy.  Standard treatment for patients with muscle-invasive disease (stage ≥ T2) are cystectomy with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy or bladder-sparing protocols consisting of chemo-irradiation.  One of the most clinically challenging tumor presentations is the high-grade non-muscle-invasive Stage T1 tumor. This tumor has already demonstrated the propensity for invasion of the lamina propria, yet because it is not muscle-invasive, it is most often treated with endoscopic therapies such as TUR followed by adjuvant immunotherapy.  Unfortunately, a significant number of these patients recur with muscle-invasive disease and require radical treatment. Biomarkers may enable more accurate predictions of which of these tumors have the propensity to progress to muscle-invasive disease and subsequently individualized staging may improve prediction of treatment benefit. Moreover, the elucidation of molecular pathways in tumorigenesis and discovery of biomarkers will enable targeted therapeutic agents to prevent deactivation of cell regulatory mechanisms underlying carcinogenesis. 
| Non-Muscle-Invasive Papillary Tumorigenesis|| |
Tumor progression is the result of accumulation of genetic alterations involving the clonal expansion of altered cell with growth advantages through sequential multi-step pathways.  Molecular and histopathologic studies indicate that urothelial carcinomas present as a heterogeneous group of tumors that may evolve along two pathways with distinct biological behavior and clinical prognosis. One pathway consists of low-grade papillary tumors that arise from normal urothelial hyperplasia and infrequently (10-15%) progress to muscle invasion.  At initial diagnosis 75% of patients with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder have non-muscle-invasive papillary tumors and the five-year survival of these tumors approaches 90% with timely treatment using bladder-sparing techniques.
Loss of heterozygosity (LOH) on Chromosome 9 is found in >50% of all bladder tumors and is more prevalent in the low-grade non-invasive papillary tumors [Table - 1]a, b.  In addition, deletions on Chromosome 9 have been demonstrated in urothelial hyperplasia and normal appearing urothelium adjacent to tumor lesions. ,, Aberrations of Chromosome 9 appear to distinguish between the two pathways of bladder cancer tumorigenesis; however, Hartmann demonstrated loss of heterozygosity on Chromosome 9 using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis in both dysplastic urothelium and in carcinoma in situ.  Therefore, deletions on Chromosome 9 may set the stage for tumorigenesis and contribute to both pathways of urothelial carcinogenesis by predisposing urothelial cells to a cascade of genetic alterations. A retrospective study applying FISH to tumor specimens demonstrated that polysomy of Chromosome 17 and LOH on Chromosome 9 were independent predictors of tumor recurrence. 
Activating growth factor signals
Low-grade non-muscle-invasive tumors demonstrate constitutive activation of cellular growth factor signaling pathways, including receptor tyrosine kinases and the RAS pathway. , Fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) is one of four members of a tyrosine kinase receptor family that play a role in embryonic development, cell growth, differentiation, proliferation and angiogenesis.  Approximately, 70% of low-grade non-muscle-invasive papillary tumors have been shown to demonstrate FGFR3 gene mutations compared with 20% of invasive tumors. The expression of activating mutant FGFR3 gene in urothelial cell carcinoma correlates with noninvasive clinical course. ,,,,, A study by van Rhijn examined 260 bladder cancer specimens and demonstrated FGFR3 genetic alterations were found predominantly (60%) in low-grade non-muscle-invasive tumors and were associated with favorable outcomes.  Additionally, van Rhijn classified tumors based on FGFR3 and MIB-1 status and demonstrated more accurate prognostic information compared to standard clinicopathologic classification.  Two studies concluded that the FGFR3 gene status did not correlate with disease progression in high-grade non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer , and a third study did not find immunohistochemistry measured expression of FGFR3 an independent predictor of recurrence.  Together, these studies suggest that in high-grade tumors, FGFR3 is no longer contributing to the maintenance of the malignant phenotype.
The HRAS is a human oncogene and key transducer of the receptor tyrosine kinases. Mutations in HRAS constitutively activate the HRAS protein and enable propagation of the growth factor signal. Mutations in HRAS are primarily associated with non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma and transgenic mouse models have demonstrated evolution of urothelial hyperplasia to low-grade non-invasive papillary tumors. , Therefore, overexpression of activated HRAS is sufficient to induce urothelial tumorigenesis and the receptor tyrosine kinase - Ras pathway contributes to the low-grade non-invasive papillary pathway of urothelial tumorigenesis.
| High-Grade Urothelial Carcinogenesis|| |
While most tumors invading the detrusor muscle are usually diagnosed in patients with no history of papillary tumors, a significant minority occur in patients with previous high-grade Stage T1 or Tis/carcinoma in situ cancers. High-grade urothelial tumors represent 40% of initially diagnosed bladder cancers and more than half of which are muscle-invasive or more extensive at the time of diagnosis.  The molecular features of these tumors will be discussed below.
Cell cycle regulation
The p53 tumor suppressor protein, encoded by the TP53 gene, is a key gatekeeper in cell cycle control.  The p53 protein inhibits cell cycle progression at G1 - S transition and plays an integral role in molecular pathways related to carcinogenesis and response to therapy, including cell cycle regulation, angiogenesis, apoptosis and DNA repair.  Mutations involved in the p53 protein dysfunction occur in two phases: initially one allele is affected, followed by loss of a second, wild-type allele.  Overexpression of p53 as determined by immunohistochemistry is routinely used to measure TP53 mutations which are infrequent in low-grade non-invasive papillary tumors, but very common (>50%) in high-grade invasive urothelial tumors and CIS tumors. ,, The product of a mutated TP53 gene has been shown to be a metabolically stable protein with a long half-life. In contrast, wild-type p53 protein has a short half-life, measured as only 6 to 30 min and therefore it does not accumulate in high enough levels to be detected by standard immunohistochemical methods. A mututed p53 protein, in contrast, is detectable by immunohistochemistry studies. In most studies, p53 nuclear accumulation is predictive of tumor recurrence, progression and mortality. ,,,,,,, However, a meta-analysis by Malats reviewing 117 studies spanning 10 years of research concluded that the evidence is not yet sufficient to conclude whether changes in P53 act as markers of outcome in patients with bladder cancer.  A second review by Schmitz-Drager analyzing 43 trials determined that in only one-half did p53 retain prognostic significance upon multivariate analysis. Furthermore, comparison between trials yielded significant differences in technical aspects of study design, including variable cut-off values for IHC and selection of antibodies.  Hence, it would appear that expression of p53 has molecular significance in bladder carcinogenesis and closely correlates with disease progression, but its prognostic utility is confounded by its close association with standard clinical and pathologic prognostic features. Nevertheless, a small independent effect cannot be excluded.
The expression of p21 protein, a cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor and an important downstream target of p53, is downregulated in the majority of urothelial carcinomas with TP53 mutations. In a retrospective study of radical cystectomy patients with long patient follow up, nuclear accumulation of p21 as detected by immunohistochemistry, was a characteristic of 64% of specimens and was an independent predictor of tumor recurrence and of survival when assessed with grade, tumor stage, lymph node status, and p53 status.  In a second study retrospectively examining radical cystectomy specimens, alteration of p21 expression was independently associated with disease progression and disease-specific survival.  Recently, a study retrospectively reviewing non-muscle-invasive bladder tumor specimens from transurethral resections (TUR) demonstrated that altered p21 expression was independently associated with disease progression but not recurrence.  Perhaps evaluation of p53 and p21 expression have synergistic effects on bladder cancer outcome enabling stratification of patients into different risk groups.
The retinoblastoma gene (RB) encodes a nuclear phosphoprotein (Rb), the phosphorylation of which has been directly involved in epithelial tumorigenesis, regulating development, differentiation, cell cycle restriction and apoptosis.  The active, dephosphorylated Rb protein binds and inactivates the transcription factor E2F, thereby inhibiting DNA synthesis.  High-grade and invasive urothelial tumors harbor inactivating mutations of the RB gene.  In a retrospective study using immunohistochemical analysis of high-grade and invasive bladder cancer specimens, p53, p21 and Rb status were independent predictors of time to recurrence and overall survival.  Urothelial tumors with alterations in both p53 and Rb expression had increased rates of recurrence and progression and worse survival then tumors harboring defects of either gene.  In addition, studies in transgenic mice with functionally inactivated p53 and Rb proteins develop exclusively high-grade CIS lesions that progress to muscle-invasive disease.  Therefore, p53 and RB act as tumor suppressors and may have a synergistic role in preventing evolution of high-grade urothelial tumors.
Cell adhesion, angiogenesis and migration
Tumor invasion is a key determinant of patient outcome and relies on not only intrinsic genetic factors of the tumor cells, but also on the local environment within which tumorigenesis occurs. The primary features of the pathway for invasive urothelial tumors will be discussed below and include decreased cell-cell adhesion, increased breakdown of extracellular matrix and increased angiogenesis.
E-cadherin is a member of the family of transmembrane glycoproteins involved in calcium-dependent intercellular adhesion. Alteration of E-cadherin expression induces a defect in cell-cell adhesion and is primarily seen in high-grade muscle-invasive tumors.  In a study of patients who underwent radical cystectomy, reduced expression of E-cadherin correlates with increased stage and grade of bladder cancer and is an independent predictor for disease progression and lymph node metastasis.  In retrospective studies that examined high-grade non-muscle-invasive bladder cancers, decreased E-cadherin expression identified by immunohistochemistry independently predicted tumor progression to invasive disease and decreased disease-specific survival. ,
Angiogenesis is critical for tumor proliferation and invasion in maintaining the supply of oxygen and nutrients. Histologically, micro-vessel density (MVD) is measured to estimate the degree of angiogenesis.  A study examining 164 patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer using immunohistochemistry to determine micro-vessel density demonstrated angiogenesis to be an independent prognostic indicator of disease-free and overall survival when evaluated in the presence of histological grade, pathologic stage and regional lymph node status.  The serum levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), a pro-angiogenic molecule and predictor of metastatic disease and associated with poor disease-free survival, however, do not demonstrate independent prognostic information on multivariate analysis. 
Cell migration is a critical factor of metastasis and contributes to both cancer cell invasion into vasculature and penetration of host tissue at distant sites.  The Rho family of GTPases plays a central role in coordinating and regulating the signal-transduction pathways that affect actin and tubulin cytoskeletons and cell migration. The Rho/ROCK pathway has been significantly associated with invasion and metastasis of bladder cancer.  Reduced expression of the newly discovered metastasis suppressor gene RhoGDI2 correlates with increased invasive and metastatic activity in bladder carcinogenesis.  A study of bladder specimens demonstrated that decreased RhoGDI2 mRNA and protein expression were independent prognostic markers of disease relapse following radical cystectomy. 
| Clinical Applications|| |
Development and discovery of molecular markers of prognosis in bladder cancer is an active area of translational research. The presence of a multitude of molecular markers that reflect bladder cancer progression suggests that multi-panel assays will likely be more predictive than the evaluation of a single marker. These can be combined in currently used clinical nomograms of prognosis if they offer additional predictive information.  Furthermore, combined application of array-based genomic and proteomic expression profiling may lead to the discovery of additional prognostic biomarkers involved in tumor progression. ,,
However the routine clinical use of incorporating molecular markers in a prognostic setting first requires prospective studies that demonstrate independent prognostic information over standard clinical and histopathologic parameters. The International Consensus Panel on Bladder Tumor Markers recently concluded that based on the current evidence, none of the current prognostic molecular markers are sufficiently validated to be used in the clinical management of patients with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder.  Furthermore, given the multiplicity, complexity and crosstalk of the biochemical pathways involved in the tumorigenesis and progression of bladder cancer, a single marker may prove to be inadequate to accurately stratify tumors with similar histopathologic characteristics into distinct prognostic pathways.
Understanding the molecular basis of tumor progression can lead to both identification of biomarkers and targets for therapy. Indeed, some may be both. For example, agents that restore tumor suppressor functions of p53 or Rb are available. , Two recent reviews discuss new agents using targeted therapeutic regimens. , Emerging therapies that target specific pathways and cell signaling molecules will need to be evaluated together with conventional therapies including chemotherapy, immunotherapy and radiotherapy. 
| Conclusion|| |
The past decade has seen an exponential accumulation of studies and information on molecular markers in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. As the complex molecular mechanisms and biological pathways that lead to urothelial tumorigenesis are increasingly understood, biological markers are being discovered that offer to enhance standard clinicopathologic information and thus optimize predictive clinical tools and personalize the therapeutic approaches to these patients to reduce the risk of progression. However, based on a limited review of current data, it would appear that none of the markers discussed here have demonstrated at this time, sufficient prognostic value to warrant their use in the clinical management of patients with bladder cancer. As this review was not intended to be comprehensive, we apologize to the many authors whose work we were not able to cite herein.
| Glossary of Terms|| |
- Urothelial Carcinoma (Transitional cell carcinoma): a malignant neoplasm derived from transitional epithelium, occurring chiefly in the urinary bladder, ureter or renal pelvis.
- Loss of Heterozygosity (LOH): In a heterozygote, the loss of one of the two alleles at one or more loci in a cell lineage or cancer cell population due to chromosome loss, deletion or mitotic crossing-over.
- Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH): A technique that employs fluorescent molecular tags to detect DNA or RNA probes hybridized to complementary chromosomes or chromatin; useful for genetic mapping and detecting chromosomal abnormalities.
- Tyrosine kinase: an enzyme that can transfer a phosphate group to a tyrosine residue in a protein; these enzymes are a subgroup of the larger class of protein kinases that function in signal transduction to regulate enzyme activity.
- RAS pathway: The Ras gene family consists of H-Ras, N-Ras and K-Ras. The Ras proteins are typically small triphosphate-binding proteins and are the common upstream molecule of several signaling pathways that play a key role in signal transduction, cytoskeletal integrity, cellular proliferation, adhesion, apoptosis and migration.
- Angiogenesis: physiological process involving the formation of new blood vessels from preexisting vessels. This is a normal process in growth and development, as well as in wound healing. However, this is also a fundamental step in the transition of tumors from a dormant state to a malignant state.
- p53 protein: tumor suppressor protein encoded by the TP53 gene located on Chromosome 17p13.1. It inhibits phase-specific cell cycle progression (G1-S) and regulates its control through the transcriptional activation of p21 WAF1/CIP1 . 
- Gene microarray analysis: collection of microscopic DNA fragments, representing single genes, arrayed on a solid surface by covalent attachment to chemically suitable matrices. Qualitative or quantitative measurements with DNA microarrays utilize the selective nature of DNA-DNA or DNA-RNA hybridizaton under high-stringency conditions and fluorophore-based detection. DNA arrays are commonly used for monitoring expression levels of thousands of genes simultaneously.
| References|| |
|1.||Beaglehole R, Irwin A, Prentice T. Changing history. The World Health Report: 2004. p. 122. |
|2.||Pelucchi C, Bosetti C, Negri E, Malvezzi M, La Vecchia C. Mechanisms of disease: The epidemiology of bladder cancer. Nat Clin Pract Urol 2006;3:327-40. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|3.||Heney NM. Natural history of superficial bladder cancer: Prognostic features and long-term disease course. Urol Clin North Am 1992;19:429-33. [PUBMED] |
|4.||Holmang S, Hedelin H, Anderstrom C, Johansson SL. The relationship among multiple recurrences, progression and prognosis of patients with stages ta and T1 transitional cell cancer of the bladder followed for at least 20 years. J Urol 1995;153:1823-7. |
|5.||May M, Helke C, Nitzke T, Vogler H, Hoschke B. Survival rates after radical cystectomy according to tumor stage of bladder carcinoma at first presentation. Urol Int 2004;72:103-11. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|6.||Spruck CH 3 rd , Ohneseit PF, Gonzalez-Zulueta M, Esrig D, Miyao N, Tsai YC, et al . Two molecular pathways to transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Cancer Res 1994;54:784-8. |
|7.||Wu XR. Urothelial tumorigenesis: A tale of divergent pathways. Nat Rev Cancer 2005;5:713-25. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|8.||Knowles MA. Molecular subtypes of bladder cancer: Jekyll and hyde or chalk and cheese? Carcinogenesis 2006;27:361-73. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|9.||Mhawech-Fauceglia P, Cheney RT, Schwaller J. Genetic alterations in urothelial bladder carcinoma: An updated review. Cancer 2006;106:1205-16. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|10.||Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. The hallmarks of cancer. Cell 2000;100:57-70. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|11.||Smith JA Jr, Labasky RF, Cockett AT, Fracchia JA, Montie JE, Rowland RG. Bladder cancer clinical guidelines panel summary report on the management of nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (stages ta, T1 and TIS). J Urol 1999;162:1697-701. [PUBMED] |
|12.||Sternberg CN, Donat SM, Bellmunt J, Millikan RE, Stadler W, De Mulder P, et al . Chemotherapy for bladder cancer: Treatment guidelines for neoadjuvant chemotherapy, bladder preservation, adjuvant chemotherapy and metastatic cancer. Urology 2007;69:62-79. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|13.||Nieder AM, Brausi M, Lamm D, O'Donnell M, Tomita K, Woo H, et al . Management of stage T1 tumors of the bladder: International consensus panel. Urology 2005;66:108-25. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|14.||Petrylak D, Faulkner JR, Van Veldhuizen PJ. Evaluation of ZD1839 for advanced transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) of the urothelium: A Southwest Oncology Group trial. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2003;22:403. |
|15.||Weinberg RA. Oncogenes, antioncogenes and the molecular bases of multistep carcinogenesis. Cancer Res 1989;49:3713-21. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|16.||Kurth KH, Denis L, Bouffioux C, Sylvester R, Debruyne FM, Pavone-Macaluso M, et al . Factors affecting recurrence and progression in superficial bladder tumours. Eur J Cancer 1995;31A:1840-6. [PUBMED] |
|17.||Stoehr R, Zietz S, Burger M, Filbeck T, Denzinger S, Obermann EC, et al . Deletions of chromosomes 9 and 8p in histologically normal urothelium of patients with bladder cancer. Eur Urol 2005;47:58-63. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|18.||Obermann EC, Junker K, Stoehr R, Dietmaier W, Zaak D, Schubert J, et al . Frequent genetic alterations in flat urothelial hyperplasias and concomitant papillary bladder cancer as detected by CGH, LOH and FISH analyses. J Pathol 2003;199:50-7. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|19.||Chow NH, Cairns P, Eisenberger CF, Schoenberg MP, Taylor DC, Epstein JI, et al . Papillary urothelial hyperplasia is a clonal precursor to papillary transitional cell bladder cancer. Int J Cancer 2000;89:514-8. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|20.||Hartmann A, Moser K, Kriegmair M, Hofstetter A, Hofstaedter F, Knuechel R. Frequent genetic alterations in simple urothelial hyperplasias of the bladder in patients with papillary urothelial carcinoma. Am J Pathol 1999;154:721-7. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|21.||Hartmann A, Schlake G, Zaak D, Hungerhuber E, Hofstetter A, Hofstaedter F, et al . Occurrence of chromosome 9 and p53 alterations in multifocal dysplasia and carcinoma in situ of human urinary bladder. Cancer Res 2002;62:809-18. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|22.||Kruger S, Mess F, Bohle A, Feller AC. Numerical aberrations of chromosome 17 and the 9p21 locus are independent predictors of tumor recurrence in non-invasive transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Int J Oncol 2003;23:41-8. |
|23.||Gschwind A, Fischer OM, Ullrich A. The discovery of receptor tyrosine kinases: Targets for cancer therapy. Nat Rev Cancer 2004;4:361-70. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|24.||Bakkar AA, Wallerand H, Radvanyi F, Lahaye JB, Pissard S, Lecerf L, et al . FGFR3 and TP53 gene mutations define two distinct pathways in urothelial cell carcinoma of the bladder. Cancer Res 2003;63:8108-12. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|25.||Dinney CP, McConkey DJ, Millikan RE, Wu X, Bar-Eli M, Adam L, et al . Focus on bladder cancer. Cancer Cell 2004;6:111-6. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|26.||Billerey C, Chopin D, Aubriot-Lorton MH, Ricol D, Gil Diez de Medina S, Van Rhijn B, et al . Frequent FGFR3 mutations in papillary non-invasive bladder (pTa) tumors. Am J Pathol 2001;158:1955-9. |
|27.||Jebar AH, Hurst CD, Tomlinson DC, Johnston C, Taylor CF, Knowles MA. FGFR3 and ras gene mutations are mutually exclusive genetic events in urothelial cell carcinoma. Oncogene 2005;24:5218-25. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|28.||Oxford G, Theodorescu D. The role of ras superfamily proteins in bladder cancer progression. J Urol 2003;170:1987-93. [PUBMED] |
|29.||van Rhijn BW, Lurkin I, Radvanyi F, Kirkels WJ, van der Kwast TH, Zwarthoff EC. The fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR mutation is a strong indicator of superficial bladder cancer with low recurrence rate. Cancer Res 2001;61:1265-8. |
|30.||van Rhijn BW, van der Kwast TH, Vis AN, Kirkels WJ, Boevι ER, J φbsis AC, et al . FGFR3 and P53 characterize alternative genetic pathways in the pathogenesis of urothelial cell carcinoma. Cancer Res 2004;64:1911-4. |
|31.||van Rhijn BW, Vis AN, van der Kwast TH, Kirkels WJ, Radvanyi F, Ooms EC, et al . Molecular grading of urothelial cell carcinoma with fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 and MIB-1 is superior to pathologic grade for the prediction of clinical outcome. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:1912-21. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|32.||Ornitz DM, Itoh N. Fibroblast growth factors. Genome Biol 2001;2:REVIEWS3005. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|33.||van Rhijn BW, Vis AN, van der Kwast TH, Kirkels WJ, Radvanyi F, Ooms EC, et al . Molecular grading of urothelial cell carcinoma with fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 and MIB-1 is superior to pathologic grade for the prediction of clinical outcome. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:1912-21. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|34.||Zieger K, Dyrskjot L, Wiuf C, Jensen JL, Andersen CL, Jensen KM, et al . Role of activating fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 mutations in the development of bladder tumors. Clin Cancer Res 2005;11:7709-19. |
|35.||Hernandez S, Lopez-Knowles E, Lloreta J, Kogevinas M, Jaramillo R, Amorůs A, et al . FGFR3 and Tp53 mutations in T1G3 transitional bladder carcinomas: Independent distribution and lack of association with prognosis. Clin Cancer Res 2005;11:5444-50. |
|36.||Mhawech-Fauceglia P, Cheney RT, Fischer G, Beck A, Herrmann FR. FGFR3 and p53 protein expressions in patients with pTa and pT1 urothelial bladder cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2006;32:231-7. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|37.||Dalbagni G, Presti J, Reuter V, Fair WR, Cordon-Cardo C. Genetic alterations in bladder cancer. Lancet 1993;34286:469-71. |
|38.||Zhang ZT, Pak J, Huang HY, Shapiro E, Sun TT, Pellicer A, et al . Role of ha-ras activation in superficial papillary pathway of urothelial tumor formation. Oncogene 2001;20:1973-80. |
|39.||Messing EM, Young TB, Hunt VB, Gilchrist KW, Newton MA, Bram LL, et al . Comparison of bladder cancer outcome in men undergoing hematuria home screening versus those with standard clinical presentations. Urology 1995;45:387-97. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|40.||Sengupta S, Harris CC. p53: Traffic cop at the crossroads of DNA repair and recombination. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2005;6:44-55. [PUBMED] |
|41.||Livingstone LR, White A, Sprouse J, Livanos E, Jacks T, Tlsty TD. Altered cell cycle arrest and gene amplification potential accompany loss of wild-type p53. Cell 1992;70:923-35. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|42.||Cordon-Cardo C. Molecular alterations in bladder cancer. Cancer Surv 1998;32:115-31. [PUBMED] |
|43.||Ortoft TF, Wolf H. Molecular alterations in bladder cancer. Urol Res 1998;26:223-33. |
|44.||Cordon-Cardo C, Dalbagni G, Saez GT, Oliva MR, Zhang ZF, Rosai J, et al . p53 mutations in human bladder cancer: Genotypic versus phenotypic patterns. Int J Cancer 1994;56:347-53. [PUBMED] |
|45.||Casetta G, Gontero P, Russo R, Pacchioni D, Tizzani A. p53 expression compared with other prognostic factors in OMS grade-I stage-ta transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol 1997;32:229-36. [PUBMED] |
|46.||Esrig D, Elmajian D, Groshen S, Freeman JA, Stein JP, Chen SC, et al . Accumulation of nuclear p53 and tumor progression in bladder cancer. N Engl J Med 1994;331:1259-64. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|47.||Gontero P, Casetta G, Zitella A, Ballario R, Pacchioni D, Magnani C, et al . Evaluation of P53 protein overexpression, Ki67 proliferative activity and mitotic index as markers of tumour recurrence in superficial transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol 2000;38:287-96. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|48.||Hernandez S, Lopez-Knowles E, Lloreta J, Kogevinas M, Jaramillo R, Amorůs A, et al . FGFR3 and Tp53 mutations in T1G3 transitional bladder carcinomas: Independent distribution and lack of association with prognosis. Clin Cancer Res 2005;11:5444-50. |
|49.||Lacombe L, Dalbagni G, Zhang ZF, Cordon-Cardo C, Fair WR, Herr HW, et al . Overexpression of p53 protein in a high-risk population of patients with superficial bladder cancer before and after bacillus calmette-guerin therapy: Correlation to clinical outcome. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:2646-52. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|50.||Lianes P, Charytonowicz E, Cordon-Cardo C, Fradet Y, Grossman HB, Hemstreet GP, et al . Biomarker study of primary nonmetastatic versus metastatic invasive bladder cancer: National cancer institute bladder tumor marker network. Clin Cancer Res 1998;4:1267-71. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|51.||Lopez-Beltran A, Luque RJ, Alvarez-Kindelan J, Quintero A, Merlo F, Carrasco JC, et al . Prognostic factors in stage T1 grade 3 bladder cancer survival: The role of G1-S modulators (p53, p21Waf1, p27kip1, cyclin D1 and cyclin D and proliferation index ki67-MIB). Eur Urol 2004;45:606-12. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|52.||Lopez-Beltran A, Luque RJ, Alvarez-Kindelan J, Quintero A, Merlo F, Requena MJ, et al . Prognostic factors in survival of patients with stage ta and T1 bladder urothelial tumors: The role of G1-S modulators (p53, p21Waf1, p27Kip1, cyclin D1 and cyclin D, proliferation index and clinicopathologic parameters. Am J Clin Pathol 2004;122:444-52. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|53.||Malats N, Bustos A, Nascimento CM, Fernandez F, Rivas M, Puente D, et al . P53 as a prognostic marker for bladder cancer: A meta-analysis and review. Lancet Oncol 2005;6:678-86. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|54.||Schmitz-Drager BJ, Goebell PJ, Heydthausen M. p53 immunohistochemistry in bladder cancer, combined analysis: A way to go? Urol Oncol 2000;5:204-10. |
|55.||Stein JP, Ginsberg DA, Grossfeld GD, Chatterjee SJ, Esrig D, Dickinson MG, et al . Effect of p21WAF1/CIP1 expression on tumor progression in bladder cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90:1072-9. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|56.||Shariat SF, Tokunaga H, Zhou J, Kim J, Ayala GE, Benedict WF, et al . p53, p21, pRB and p16 expression predict clinical outcome in cystectomy with bladder cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1014-24. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|57.||Shariat SF, Ashfaq R, Sagalowsky AI, Lotan Y. Predictive value of cell cycle biomarkers in nonmuscle invasive bladder transitional cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2007;177:481-7. |
|58.||Genovese C, Trani D, Caputi M, Claudio PP. Cell cycle control and beyond: Emerging roles for the retinoblastoma gene family. Oncogene 2006;25:5201-9. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|59.||Chellappan SP, Hiebert S, Mudryj M, Horowitz JM, Nevins JR. The E2F transcription factor is a cellular target for the RB protein. Cell 1991;65:1053-61. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|60.||Mitra AP, Lin H, Datar RH, Cote RJ. Molecular biology of bladder cancer: Prognostic and clinical implications. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2006;5:67-77. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|61.||Chatterjee SJ, Datar R, Youssefzadeh D, George B, Goebell PJ, Stein JP, et al . Combined effects of p53, p21 and pRb expression in the progression of bladder transitional cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1007-13. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|62.||Cote RJ, Dunn MD, Chatterjee SJ, Stein JP, Shi SR, Tran QC, et al . Elevated and absent pRb expression is associated with bladder cancer progression and has cooperative effects with p53. Cancer Res 1998;58:1090-4. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|63.||Zhang ZT, Pak J, Shapiro E, Sun TT, Wu XR. Urothelium-specific expression of an oncogene in transgenic mice induced the formation of carcinoma in situ and invasive transitional cell carcinoma. Cancer Res 1999;59:3512-7. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|64.||Garcia del Muro X, Torregrosa A, Munoz J, Castellsaguι X, Condom E, Viguιs F, et al . Prognostic value of the expression of E-cadherin and beta-catenin in bladder cancer. Eur J Cancer 2000;36:357-62. |
|65.||Matsumoto K, Shariat SF, Casella R, Wheeler TM, Slawin KM, Lerner SP. Preoperative plasma soluble E-cadherin predicts metastases to lymph nodes and prognosis in patients undergoing radical cystectomy. J Urol 2003;170:2248-52. [PUBMED] |
|66.||Popov Z, Gil-Diez de Medina S, Lefrere-Belda MA, Hoznek A, Bastuji-Garin S, Abbou CC, et al . Low E-cadherin expression in bladder cancer at the transcriptional and protein level provides prognostic information. Br J Cancer 2000;83:209-14. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|67.||Shariat SF, Pahlavan S, Baseman AG, Brown RM, Green AE, Wheeler TM, et al . E-cadherin expression predicts clinical outcome in carcinoma in situ of the urinary bladder. Urology 2001;57:60-5. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|68.||Weidner N, Semple JP, Welch WR, Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis and metastasis--correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1991;324:1-8. [PUBMED] |
|69.||Bochner BH, Cote RJ, Weidner N, Groshen S, Chen SC, Skinner DG, et al . Angiogenesis in bladder cancer: Relationship between microvessel density and tumor prognosis. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:1603-12. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|70.||Bernardini S, Fauconnet S, Chabannes E, Henry PC, Adessi G, Bittard H. Serum levels of vascular endothelial growth factor as a prognostic factor in bladder cancer. J Urol 2001;166:1275-9. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|71.||Chambers AF, MacDonald IC, Schmidt EE, Koop S, Morris VL, Khokha R, et al . Steps in tumor metastasis: New concepts from intravital videomicroscopy. Cancer Metastasis Rev 1995;14:279-301. [PUBMED] |
|72.||Kamai T, Tsujii T, Arai K, Takagi K, Asami H, Ito Y, et al . Significant association of Rho/ROCK pathway with invasion and metastasis of bladder cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2003;9:2632-41. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|73.||Gildea JJ, Seraj MJ, Oxford G, Harding MA, Hampton GM, Moskaluk CA, et al . RhoGDI2 is an invasion and metastasis suppressor gene in human cancer. Cancer Res 2002;62:6418-23. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|74.||Theodorescu D, Sapinoso LM, Conaway MR, Oxford G, Hampton GM, Frierson HF Jr. Reduced expression of metastasis suppressor RhoGDI2 is associated with decreased survival for patients with bladder cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10:3800-6. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|75.||International Bladder Cancer Nomogram Consortium, Bochner BH, Kattan MW, Vora KC. Postoperative nomogram predicting risk of recurrence after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:3967-72. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|76.||Aaboe M, Marcussen N, Jensen KM, Thykjaer T, Dyrskjot L, Orntoft TF. Gene expression profiling of noninvasive primary urothelial tumours using microarrays. Br J Cancer 2005;93:1182-90. |
|77.||Aebersold R, Mann M. Mass spectrometry-based proteomics. Nature 2003;422:198-207. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|78.||Sanchez-Carbayo M, Cordon-Cardo C. Applications of array technology: Identification of molecular targets in bladder cancer. Br J Cancer 2003;89:2172-7. |
|79.||Habuchi T, Marberger M, Droller MJ, Hemstreet GP 3rd, Grossman HB, Schalken JA, et al . Prognostic markers for bladder cancer: International consensus panel on bladder tumor markers. Urology 2005;66:64-74. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|80.||Wang S, El-Deiry WS. The p53 pathway: Targets for the development of novel cancer therapeutics. Cancer Treat Res 2004;119:175-87. [PUBMED] |
|81.||McNeish IA, Bell SJ, Lemoine NR. Gene therapy progress and prospects: Cancer gene therapy using tumour suppressor genes. Gene Ther 2004;11:497-503. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|82.||Thomas CY, Theodorescu D. Molecular markers of prognosis and novel therapeutic strategies for urothelial cell carcinomas. World J Urol 2006;24:565-78. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|83.||Mitra AP, Datar RH, Cote RJ. Molecular pathways in invasive bladder cancer: New insights into mechanisms, progression and target identification. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:5552-64. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|84.||Titus B, Frierson HF Jr, Conaway M, Ching K, Guise T, Chirgwin J, et al . Endothelin axis is a target of the lung metastasis suppressor gene RhoGDI2. Cancer Res 2005;65:7320-7. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|85.||Smith ND, Rubenstein JN, Eggener SE, Kozloswki JM. The p53 tumor suppressor gene and nuclear protein: Basic science review and relevance in the management of bladder cancer. J Urol 2003;169:1219-28. |
[Table - 1]
|This article has been cited by|
||New and Promising Strategies in the Management of Bladder Cancer
| ||Andrea B. Apolo, Nicholas J. Vogelzang, Dan Theodorescu |
| ||American Society of Clinical Oncology Educational Book. 2015; (35): 105 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Expression of regulatory proteins and proliferative activity in relation to phenotypic characteristics of upper urothelial carcinoma
| ||Zana Dolicanin, Ljubinka Jankovic-Velickovic, Biljana Djordjevic, Milan Visnjic, Ivana Pesic, Ana Ristic, Vesna Marjanovic |
| ||Vojnosanitetski pregled. 2011; 68(7): 567 |
|[VIEW] | [DOI]|
||Evaluation of methylation pattern in promoter region of E-cadherin gene and its relation to tumor grade and stage in breast cancer
| ||Shargh, S.A., Sakizli, M., Farajnia, S., Montazer-Saheb, S. |
| ||African Journal of Biotechnology. 2011; 10(10): 1745-1751 |