Preliminary study on the diagnostic value of urine cell glucose metabolism detection for male urothelial carcinoma

This study assessed the potential of urine abnormal glycolytic metabolism detection versus urine cytology in diagnosing male urothelial carcinoma, using pathological results as the gold standard. Urine samples were collected from suspected urothelial carcinoma male patients at Zhejiang Cancer Hospital from September 2021 to February 2024. Both urine cell glycometabolism detection and urine cytology examination were performed on the same samples, with clinical data including tumor classification and grading gathered for statistical analysis. A total of 105 male patients were enrolled, with 83 (79.05%) diagnosed with urothelial carcinoma. Stratified analysis based on urine glycometabolism detection (high risk, low risk, no abnormalities) showed the sensitivity, specificity and Area Under Curve (AUC) values of “Glucose metabolism 1” (high risk) as 74.70%, 59.09% and 0.6689 (p = 0.0151), and “Glucose metabolism 2” (high/low risk) as 82.56%, 59.09% and 0.7082 (p = 0.0027). Urine cytology results showed the sensitivity, specificity, and AUC values of “Urine Exfoliative 1” (malignant tumor cells found) as 22.89%, 90.91% and 0.5690 (p = 0.3211), “Urine Exfoliative 2” (finding or suspecting malignant tumor cells) as 42.17%, 90.91% and 0.6654 (p = 0.0174), and “Urine Exfoliative 3” (finding/suspecting/not excluding malignant tumor cells) as 60.24%, 72.73% and 0.6648 (p = 0.0178). The combined diagnosis of “Glucose metabolism 2” and “Urine Exfoliative 4” (no tumor cells found) improved diagnostic efficiency, with sensitivity 62.65%, specificity 95.45% and AUC = 0.7905 (p < 0.0001). “Glucose metabolism 2” had a sensitivity of 86.21% for low-grade urothelial carcinoma, while “Urine Exfoliative 4” had a sensitivity of 58.62%. Compared to urine cytology, urine cell glycometabolism detection improved sensitivity for diagnosing urothelial carcinoma but had lower specificity. Combined diagnosis enhanced sensitivity and specificity, and glycometabolism detection showed superior sensitivity for low-grade urothelial carcinoma, serving as an efficient non-invasive diagnostic tool.

Urine cell glycometabolism detection; Urine cytology examination; Urothelial carcinoma; Sensitivity; Specificity

[1] Dyrskjøt L, Hansel DE, Efstathiou JA, Knowles MA, Galsky MD, Teoh J, et al. Bladder cancer. Nature Reviews Disease Primers. 2023; 9: 58.

[2] Li C, Yang J, Xu F, Han D, Zheng S, Kaaya RE, et al. A prognostic nomogram for the cancer-specific survival of patients with upper-tract urothelial carcinoma based on the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. BMC Cancer. 2020; 20: 534.

[3] Lefort F, Rhanine Y, Larroquette M, Domblides C, Heraudet L, Sionneau B, et al. Clinical and biological differences between upper tract carcinoma and bladder urothelial cancer, including implications for clinical practice. Cancers. 2023; 15: 5558.

[4] Siegel RL, Giaquinto AN, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2024. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2024; 74: 12–49.

[5] Gandhi J, Chen JF, Al-Ahmadie H. Urothelial carcinoma: divergent differentiation and morphologic subtypes. Surgical Pathology Clinics. 2022; 15: 641–659.

[6] Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2021; 71: 209–249.

[7] Safiri S, Kolahi AA, Naghavi M; Global Burden of Disease Bladder Cancer Collaborators. Global, regional and national burden of bladder cancer and its attributable risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease study 2019. BMJ Global Health. 2021; 6: e004128.

[8] Doshi B, Athans SR, Woloszynska A. Biological differences underlying sex and gender disparities in bladder cancer: current synopsis and future directions. Oncogenesis. 2023; 12: 44.

[9] Hemelt M, Yamamoto H, Cheng KK, Zeegers MP. The effect of smoking on the male excess of bladder cancer: a meta-analysis and geographical analyses. International Journal of Cancer. 2009; 124: 412–429.

[10] Freedman ND, Silverman DT, Hollenbeck AR, Schatzkin A, Abnet CC. Association between smoking and risk of bladder cancer among men and women. JAMA. 2011; 306: 737–745.

[11] Territo A, Gallioli A, Diana P, Boissier R, Fontana M, Gaya JM, et al. DNA methylation urine biomarkers test in the diagnosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: results from a single-center prospective clinical trial. The Journal of Urology. 2022; 208: 570–579.

[12] Baard J, de Bruin DM, Zondervan PJ, Kamphuis G, de la Rosette J, Laguna MP. Diagnostic dilemmas in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Nature Reviews Urology. 2017; 14: 181–191.

[13] Rouprêt M, Babjuk M, Compérat E, Zigeuner R, Sylvester RJ, Burger M, et al. European association of urology guidelines on upper urinary tract urothelial cell carcinoma: 2015 update. European Urology. 2015; 68: 868–879.

[14] Taneja SS. Re: inadequacy of biopsy for diagnosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: implications for conservative management. The Journal of Urology. 2012; 187: 1583–1584.

[15] Renshaw AA. Comparison of ureteral washing and biopsy specimens in the community setting. Cancer. 2006; 108: 45–48.

[16] Baard J, Cormio L, Dasgupta R, Maruzzi D, Rais-Bahrami S, Serrano A, et al. Unveiling the challenges of UTUC biopsies and cytology: insights from a global real-world practice study. World Journal of Urology. 2024; 42: 177.

[17] Wang Z, Shi H, Xu Y, Fang Y, Song J, Jiang W, et al. Intravesical therapy for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a comprehensive review. Cancers. 2023; 15: 5020.

[18] Mori K, D’Andrea D, Enikeev DV, Egawa S, Shariat SF. En bloc resection for nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer: review of the recent literature. Current Opinion in Urology. 2020; 30: 41–47.

[19] Cheng YY, Sun Y, Li J, Liang L, Zou TJ, Qu WX, et al. Transurethral endoscopic submucosal en bloc dissection for nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer: a comparison study of HybridKnife-assisted versus conventional dissection technique. Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics. 2018; 14: 1606–1612.

[20] Dobruch J, Herr H. Should all patients receive single chemotherapeutic agent instillation after bladder tumour resection? BJU International. 2009; 104: 170–174.

[21] Maimon Y, Amiel G, Cohen Z, Hoffman A, Samuels N. Prevention of bladder cancer recurrence with the botanical formula LCS103: a case series study. Integrative Cancer Therapies. 2024; 23: 15347354241233233.

[22] Dimashkieh H, Wolff DJ, Smith TM, Houser PM, Nietert PJ, Yang J. Evaluation of urovysion and cytology for bladder cancer detection: a study of 1835 paired urine samples with clinical and histologic correlation. Cancer Cytopathology. 2013; 121: 591–597.

[23] Li X, Cui M, Gu X, Fang D, Li H, Qin S, et al. Pattern and risk factors of local recurrence after nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. World Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2020; 18: 114.

[24] Tan WS, Sarpong R, Khetrapal P, Rodney S, Mostafid H, Cresswell J, et al. Does urinary cytology have a role in haematuria investigations? BJU International. 2019; 123: 74–81.

[25] Nagai T, Naiki T, Etani T, Iida K, Noda Y, Shimizu N, et al. UroVysion fluorescence in situ hybridization in urothelial carcinoma: a narrative review and future perspectives. Translational Andrology and Urology. 2021; 10: 1908–1917.

[26] Sandberg AA, Berger CS. Review of chromosome studies in urological tumors. II. Cytogenetics and molecular genetics of bladder cancer. The Journal of Urology. 1994; 151: 545–560.

[27] Laukhtina E, Shim SR, Mori K, D’Andrea D, Soria F, Rajwa P, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of novel urinary biomarker tests in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. European Urology Oncology. 2021; 4: 927–942.

[28] Bellmunt J, Hussain M, Gschwend JE, Albers P, Oudard S, Castellano D, et al. Adjuvant atezolizumab versus observation in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor010): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. The Lancet Oncology. 2021; 22: 525–537.

[29] Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Weinberg, hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell. 2011; 144: 646–674.

[30] Vander Heiden MG, Cantley LC, Thompson CB. Thompson, understanding the Warburg effect: the metabolic requirements of cell proliferation. Science. 2009; 324: 1029–1033.

[31] Tang Y, Wang Z, Li Z, Kim J, Deng Y, Li Y, et al. High-throughput screening of rare metabolically active tumor cells in pleural effusion and peripheral blood of lung cancer patients. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2017; 114: 2544–2549.

[32] Li Z, Wang Z, Tang Y, Lu X, Chen J, Dong Y, et al. Liquid biopsy-based single-cell metabolic phenotyping of lung cancer patients for informative diagnostics. Nature Communications. 2019; 10: 3856.

[33] Alfred Witjes J, Lebret T, Compérat EM, Cowan NC, De Santis M, Bruins HM, et al. Updated 2016 EAU guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer. European Urology. 2017; 71: 462–475.

[34] Mathupala SP, Ko YH, Pedersen PL. Pedersen, Hexokinase II: cancer’s double-edged sword acting as both facilitator and gatekeeper of malignancy when bound to mitochondria. Oncogene. 2006; 25: 4777–4786.

[35] Wang L, Xiong H, Wu F, Zhang Y, Wang J, Zhao L, et al. Hexokinase 2-mediated Warburg effect is required for PTEN- and p53-deficiency-driven prostate cancer growth. Cell Reports. 2014; 8: 1461–1474.

[36] Patra KC, Wang Q, Bhaskar PT, Miller L, Wang Z, Wheaton W, et al. Hexokinase 2 is required for tumor initiation and maintenance and its systemic deletion is therapeutic in mouse models of cancer. Cancer Cell. 2013; 24: 213–228.

[37] Wolf A, Agnihotri S, Micallef J, Mukherjee J, Sabha N, Cairns R, et al. Hexokinase 2 is a key mediator of aerobic glycolysis and promotes tumor growth in human glioblastoma multiforme. Journal of Experimental Medicine. 2011; 208: 313–326.

[38] Yang L, Yan X, Chen J, Zhan Q, Hua Y, Xu S, et al. Hexokinase 2 discerns a novel circulating tumor cell population associated with poor prognosis in lung cancer patients. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2021; 118: e2012228118.

[39] Liu C, Shi J, Jiang Z, Jiang S, Wu Y, Peng D, et al. RP11-495P10.1 promotes HCC cell proliferation by regulating reprogramming of glucose metabolism and acetylation of the NR4A3 promoter via the PDK1/PDH axis. Acta Biochimica et Biophysica Sinica. 2024; 56: 44–53.

[40] Sun T, Du B, Diao Y, Li X, Chen S, Li Y. ATAD2 expression increases [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose uptake value in lung adenocarcinoma via AKT-GLUT1/HK2 pathway. BMB Reports. 2019; 52: 457–462.

[41] Wang Z, Chen J, Yang L, Cao M, Yu Y, Zhang R, et al. Single-cell sequencing-enabled hexokinase 2 assay for noninvasive bladder cancer diagnosis and screening by detecting rare malignant cells in urine. Analytical Chemistry. 2020; 92: 16284–16292.

[42] Cavallo D, Casadio V, Bravaccini S, Iavicoli S, Pira E, Romano C, et al. Assessment of DNA damage and telomerase activity in exfoliated urinary cells as sensitive and noninvasive biomarkers for early diagnosis of bladder cancer in ex-workers of a rubber tyres industry. BioMed Research International. 2014; 2014: 370907.

[43] Wang D, Qiu Z, Wu C. Diagnostic value of the combination of DAPK methylation in urinary sediment and B ultrasound for recurrent urinary bladder cancer. World Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2023; 21: 267.

[44] Gupta M, VandenBussche CJ, Bivalacqua TJ. Urinary cytology and the Paris system for reporting urinary cytology: implications for urological management. Cytopathology. 2018; 29: 368–370.

[45] Manna AK, Sarkar M, Bandyopadhyay U, Chakrabarti S, Pathak S, Sarkar DK. Cytological and morphometric study of urinary epithelial cells with histopathological correlation. Indian Journal of Surgery. 2014; 76: 26–30.

[46] Wen J, Liu W, Shen X, Hu W. PI-RADS v2.1 and PSAD for the prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer among patients with PSA levels of 4–10 ng/ml. Scientific Reports. 2024; 14: 6570.

[47] Raspollini MR, Comperat EM, Lopez-Beltran A, Montironi R, Cimadamore A, Tsuzuki T, et al. News in the classification of WHO 2022 bladder tumors. Pathologica. 2022; 115: 32–40.

[48] Ritch CR, Velasquez MC, Kwon D, Becerra MF, Soodana-Prakash N, Atluri VS, et al. Use and validation of the AUA/SUO risk grouping for nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer in a contemporary cohort. The Journal of Urology. 2020; 203: 505–511.

[49] Khalatbari F, Moafi-Madani M, Amin A. Mixed-grade urothelial carcinoma: insights into clinical behavior and prognostic implications compared to pure low-grade and high-grade urothelial carcinomas. To be published in Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine. 2024. [Preprint].

[50] Flezar MS. Urine and bladder washing cytology for detection of urothelial carcinoma: standard test with new possibilities. Radiology and Oncology. 2010; 44: 207–214.

[51] Lopez-Beltran A, Cheng L, Gevaert T, Blanca A, Cimadamore A, Santoni M, et al. Current and emerging bladder cancer biomarkers with an emphasis on urine biomarkers. Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics. 2020; 20: 231–243.

[52] Białek Ł, Bilski K, Dobruch J, Krajewski W, Szydełko T, Kryst P, et al. Non-invasive biomarkers in the diagnosis of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma—a systematic review. Cancers. 2022; 14: 1520.

[53] Szarvas T, Módos O, Horváth A, Nyirády P. Why are upper tract urothelial carcinoma two different diseases? Translational Andrology and Urology. 2016; 5: 636–647.

[54] Lodde M, Mian C, Wiener H, Haitel A, Pycha A, Marberger M. Detection of upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma with ImmunoCyt: a preliminary report. Urology. 2001; 58: 362–366.

[55] Seisen T, Peyronnet B, Dominguez-Escrig JL, Bruins HM, Yuan CY, Babjuk M, et al. Oncologic outcomes of kidney-sparing surgery versus radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review by the EAU non-muscle invasive bladder cancer guidelines panel. European Urology. 2016; 70: 1052–1068.

[56] Krajewski W, Łaszkiewicz J, Nowak Ł, Szydełko T. Current methods facilitating diagnosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a comprehensive literature review. Current Opinion in Urology. 2023; 33: 230–238.