Transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder, the second
most common tumor of the genitourinary tract, is also the second most common
cause of death from these cancers. In 2001, an estimated 54,300 new cases will
be diagnosed in the United States, and some 12,400 patients will die of the
Approximately 80% of patients with primary bladder cancer experience
low-grade tumors confined to the superficial mucosa, and the majority are
amenable to initial transurethral resection and selected administration of
intravesical immunotherapy or chemotherapy. The risk of recurrence for
patients with superficial bladder tumors can be as high as 70%, however.
One-third of recurrent tumors may demonstrate tumor progression to a higher
grade and/or stage of disease. Muscle-invasive tumors occur initially in 15% to
30% of all bladder cancer patients; 50% of those treated locally for invasive
tumors will relapse with metastatic disease within 2 years of treatment.
These data underscore the heterogeneous nature and malignant potential of
transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder.
The optimal management of invasive bladder cancer requires the detection and
accurate assessment of the tumor’s biological potential. Treatment strategies
for patients with bladder cancer are currently dictated by histologic
evaluation, including determination of tumor grade and stage as the primary
prognostic variables. Although these two conventional histopathologic variables
provide a certain degree of stratification of a tumor’s biological
characteristics, there remains a significant degree of tumor heterogeneity
within the various prognostic subgroups. This makes it difficult to accurately
and reliably predict the tumor’s aggressiveness. The ability to precisely
predict an individual tumor’s true biological potential would facilitate
treatment selection for patients who may benefit from adjuvant therapy and
identify patients who may require less aggressive strategies. Intense research
efforts are ongoing to best characterize bladder cancer and its varying
Transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder has generally been viewed as two
different disease processes. Superficial tumors are most often locally
proliferative and recurrent but can become invasive and even metastatic.
Superficial tumors that maintain a malignant phenotype may be treated more
effectively with early, aggressive intravesical therapy or even cystectomy. The
use of molecular markers may guide decision-making in the treatment of
superficial bladder cancers. Muscle-invasive cancer, notorious for its
potential clinical virulence, is ideally treated aggressively, but there
remains a significant incidence of recurrence and disease progression in some
patients, who may ultimately benefit from an adjuvant form of therapy.
The need to predict which superficial tumors will recur or progressand
which invasive tumors will metastasizehas led to an ongoing search for
improved understanding of bladder carcinogenesis and metastasis. With the advent
of new molecular techniques, the field of medical molecular biology has exploded
in recent years, resulting in detailed analysis of human cells and tissues on
the DNA, RNA, and protein levels. The molecular and genetic changes in
transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder can be schematically classified into
three separate, but intertwined, events: (1) chromosomal alterations,
representing the initial event in carcinogenesis; (2) tumor proliferation,
caused by loss of cell-cycle regulation; and (3) metastasis, in which the
initial tumor breaks from its original confined environment, aided, in part, by
processes such as angiogenesis and loss of cell adhesion.
We believe that the accumulation of these successive genetic alterationsrather
than a single genetic event in timedetermines a tumor’s phenotype and,
subsequently, the patient’s clinical outcome. In this review, we will
summarize the recent literature regarding molecular and genetic changes in
bladder cancer and comment on potentially improved diagnostic tools and
treatment regimens becoming available as a result of our better understanding of
these molecular pathways.
Our understanding of tumor biology has evolved rapidly over the past decade.
Advances in molecular biology, immunology, and cytogenetics have prompted this
progress. An increase in knowledge has provided an opportunity to identify and
evaluate tumor characteristics beyond the scope of general histology and gross
DNA content and to distinguish the potential behavior of an individual tumor. As
the role of tumor markers in the diagnosis and prognosis of bladder cancer
grows, it is important to understand the various technologic, methodologic, and
analytic issues regarding each diagnostic modality. Several techniques can be
applied to evaluate a tumor marker; most are only applied in a research setting,
For the clinical urologist, the most widely used evaluation method is
immunohistochemistry. Translational research has enhanced the application and
evaluation of immunohistochemical techniques with potentially important clinical
roles in bladder cancer. Currently, most tumor markers that have been studied
and merit a role in the contemporary clinical decision-making process for
bladder cancer have evolved from the application of immunohistochemistry.
Standardization of the technique and its interpretation will ultimately be
necessary for successful and consistent application of immunohistochemistry.
With proper controls and standardization, immunohistochemistry will remain one
of the principle techniques used to evaluate various tumor markers. Although
efforts have been made to standardize immunohistochemistry, the limitations of
this technique must be realized before we can develop a consensus as to how to
perform the procedure. Despite these limitations, immunohistochemistry maintains
some translational application in the analysis of various bladder cancer
markers. Other more sophisticated and costly techniques, such as single-strand
conformational polymorphism, DNA sequencing, or polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based
analyses, are currently used in the research setting but are not yet applicable
to clinical decision-making.
Bladder cancer is an excellent model for the study of molecular changes at
the DNA level, owing to its distinctly different subtypes (superficial and
muscle-invasive) and their different propensities to progress. Such DNA
alterations in bladder cancer have been studied in a variety of ways, ranging
from cytogenetics to DNA ploidy to loss of heterozygosity. DNA alterations
can result from a number of genetic insults such as point and insertional/deletional
mutations, translocations, and loss of alleles. Each insult may affect the
translated protein product. The large fund of molecular knowledge developed in
recent years about carcinogenesis has provided some evidence about the different
genetic pathways for bladder cancer.
Earlier work in the field of molecular oncology focused on oncogenes, which
are normal cellular genes that contribute to the malignant phenotype of a tumor
by overexpressing the normal gene product or, in some cases, by expressing a
protein product with altered function. Overexpression of the normal gene product
is usually achieved by gene amplification or chromosomal translocation of the
gene to an area downstream of a powerful promoter. However, expression of a
mutated protein product can also lead to activation of the malignant phenotype.
Oncogenes believed to be important in human malignancies include cH-ras, c-myc,
MDM2, and HER2/neu (aka c-erbB2).
cH-ras GeneThe cH-ras gene is an active oncogene thought to be involved
in the development and progression of human bladder cancer. Mutational studies
of the ras gene family have demonstrated that alterations in codons 12 and 61 of
the H-ras gene occur in up to 20% of bladder cancers.[6-8] One study, employing
PCR amplification followed by oligonucleotide-specific hybridization, reported
that 36% of bladder tumors had the same mutation on codon 12 of the H-ras
gene. In general, the activation of H-ras occurs by a single-point mutation
(G d A) in codon 12, although other mutations have been described.
Clinically, Fontana and colleagues demonstrated a statistically significant
relationship between the overexpression of the c-ras oncogene and early
recurrence in patients with superficial bladder cancer. These data suggest a
potential prognostic role for the c-ras oncogene in patients with superficial
bladder cancer, but currently these techniques apply only in a research setting.
c-myc GeneAn important regulator of cellular proliferation, the
gene family encodes for nuclear phosphoproteins containing DNA-binding
activity. The c-myc oncogene has been shown to be overexpressed in several
human tumors including bladder cancer.[12,13] Deregulation of the myc gene
family occurs with chromosomal translocation and gene amplification, and
studies have demonstrated that myc overexpression promotes cellular
proliferation. Although the genetic mechanism causing overexpression of the
c-myc gene in bladder cancer is unknown, its overexpression has been shown to be
associated with high-grade bladder cancer.
Kotake and associates demonstrated that expression of the c-myc gene product
correlates with the nuclear grade of bladder cancer. In a study with
conflicting results, however, Lipponen found no independent prognostic value for
Myc proteins with respect to prognosis for patients with transitional cell
carcinoma of the bladder. Currently, the prognostic significance of c-myc
gene expression is unknown, and further evaluation will be required to determine
its prognostic role.
HER2/neuThe proto-oncogene HER2/neu has been extensively studied and
implicated in a number of tumors, including breast, prostate, and bladder
cancers. The HER2/neu oncogene encodes a transmembrane glycoprotein similar
to the epidermal growth factor (EGF) receptor, having tyrosine kinase
activity and the ability to stimulate cellular growth.
Initial studies of HER2/neu were performed in breast carcinoma and
demonstrated a significant relationship between gene expression, tumor
progression, and overall survival. Subsequently, several studies reported
that HER2/neu expression in bladder cancer patients is associated with
higher-stage tumors,[20-22] increased tumor progression, greater incidence
of metastasis, and reduced overall survival. These investigations
suggest a prognostic value of HER2/neu expression in human bladder cancer; other
studies have reported conflicting results, concluding that evaluation of the
oncogene provides no additional prognostic value over the previously established
predictors of grade and stage for transitional cell carcinoma.[23,24]
In light of these discrepant results, further evaluation will be required to
accurately determine the prognostic value of HER2/neu in bladder cancer.
1. Greenlee RT, Hill-Harmon MB, Taylor M, et al: Cancer statistics 2001. CA
Cancer J Clin 50:7-33, 2001.
2. Stein J, Lieskovsky G, Cote R, et al: Radical cystectomy in the treatment
of invasive bladder cancer: Long-term results in 1,054 patients. J Clin Oncol
3. Droller MJ: Markers in bladder cancerIssues to consider (editorial). J
Urol 160:2009-2010, 1998 (see comments in J Urol 160:1971-1974, 1998
4. Malkowicz SB: Superficial bladder cancer: The role of molecular markers in
the treatment of high-risk superficial disease. Semin Urol Oncol 15:169-178,
5. Adshead JM, Kessling AM, Ogden CW: Genetic initiation, progression and
prognostic markers in transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: A summary of
the structural and transcriptional changes, and the role of developmental genes.
Br J Urol 82:503-512, 1998.
6. Kroft SH, Oyasu R: Urinary bladder cancer: Mechanisms of development and
progression. Lab Invest 71:158-174, 1994.
7. Moriyama N, Umeda T, Akaza H, et al: Expression of ras p21 oncogene
product on human bladder tumors. Urol Int 44:260-263, 1989.
8. Nagata Y, Abe M, Kobayashi K, et al: Point mutations of c-ras genes in
human bladder cancer and kidney cancer. Jpn J Cancer Res 81:22-27, 1990.
9. Fradet Y: Markers of prognosis in superficial bladder cancer. Semin Urol
10. Fontana D, Bellina M, Scoffone C, et al: Evaluation of c-ras oncogene
product (p21) in superficial bladder cancer. Eur Urol 29:470-476, 1996.
11. Koskinen PJ, Alitalo K: Role of myc amplification and overexpression in
cell growth, differentiation and death. Semin Cancer Biol 4:3-12, 1993.
12. Berns EM, Klijn JG, van Putten WL, et al: c-myc amplification is a better
prognostic factor than HER2/neu amplification in primary breast cancer. Cancer
Res 52:1107-1113, 1992.
13. Kotake T, Saiki S, Kinouchi T, et al: Detection of the c-myc gene product
in urinary bladder cancer. Jpn J Cancer Res 81:1198-1201, 1990.
14. Watt RA, Shatzman AR, Rosenberg M: Expression and characterization of the
human c-myc DNA-binding protein. Mol Cell Biol 5:448-456, 1985.
15. Lipponen PK: Expression of c-myc protein is related to cell proliferation
and expression of growth factor receptors in transitional cell bladder cancer. J
Pathol 175:203-210, 1995.
16. Underwood M, Bartlett J, Reeves J, et al: C-erbB-2 gene amplification: A
molecular marker in recurrent bladder tumors? Cancer Res 55:2422-2430, 1995.
17. Akiyama T, Sudo C, Ogawara H, et al: The product of the human c-erbB-2
gene: A 185-kilodalton glycoprotein with tyrosine kinase activity. Science
18. Lee J, Dull TJ, Lax I, et al: HER2 cytoplasmic domain generates normal
mitogenic and transforming signals in a chimeric receptor. EMBO J 8:167-173,
19. Slamon DJ, Godolphin W, Jones LA, et al: Studies of the HER-2/neu proto-oncogene
in human breast and ovarian cancer. Science 244:707-712, 1989.
20. Gorgoulis VG, Barbatis C, Poulias I, et al: Molecular and
immunohistochemical evaluation of epidermal growth factor receptor and c-erbB-2
gene product in transitional cell carcinomas of the urinary bladder: A study in
Greek patients. Mod Pathol 8:758-764, 1995.
21. Sato K, Moriyama M, Mori S, et al: An immunohistologic evaluation of
c-erbB-2 gene product in patients with urinary bladder carcinoma. Cancer
22. Moriyama M, Akiyama T, Yamamoto T, et al: Expression of c-erbB-2 gene
product in urinary bladder cancer. J Urol 145:423-427, 1991.
23. Lipponen P, Eskelinen M: Expression of epidermal growth factor receptor
in bladder cancer as related to established prognostic factors, oncoprotein
(c-erbB-2, p53) expression and long-term prognosis. Br J Cancer 69:1120-1125,
24. Mellon JK, Lunec J, Wright C, et al: C-erbB-2 in bladder cancer:
Molecular biology, correlation with epidermal growth factor receptors and
prognostic value. J Urol 155:321-326, 1996 (see comment in J Urol 155:2, 1996).
25. Li M, Zhang ZF, Reuter VE, et al: Chromosome 3 allelic losses and
microsatellite alterations in transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary
bladder. Am J Pathol 149:229-235, 1996.
26. Takle LA, Knowles MA: Deletion mapping implicates two tumor suppressor
genes on chromosome 8p in the development of bladder cancer. Oncogene
27. Wagner U, Bubendorf L, Gasser TC, et al: Chromosome 8p deletions are
associated with invasive tumor growth in urinary bladder cancer. Am J Pathol
28. Habuchi T, Devlin J, Elder PA, et al: Detailed deletion mapping of
chromosome 9q in bladder cancer: Evidence for two tumour suppressor loci.
Oncogene 11:1671-1674, 1995.
29. Keen AJ, Knowles MA: Definition of two regions of deletion on chromosome
9 in carcinoma of the bladder. Oncogene 9:2083-2088, 1994.
30. Simoneau AR, Spruck CH 3rd, Gonzalez-Zulueta M, et al: Evidence for two
tumor suppressor loci associated with proximal chromosome 9p to q and distal
chromosome 9q in bladder cancer and the initial screening for GAS1 and PTC
mutations. Cancer Res 56:5039-5043, 1996.
31. Knowles MA: The genetics of transitional cell carcinoma: Progress and
potential clinical application. BJU Int 84:412-427, 1999.
32. Orlow I, Lacombe L, Hannon GJ, et al: Deletion of the p16 and p15 genes
in human bladder tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 87:1524-1529, 1995 (see comment in J
Natl Cancer Inst 87:1499-1501, 1995).
33. Packenham JP, Taylor JA, Anna CH, et al: Homozygous deletions but no
sequence mutations in coding regions of p15 or p16 in human primary bladder
tumors. Mol Carcinog 14:147-151, 1995.
34. Williamson MP, Elder PA, Shaw ME, et al: p16 (CDKN2) is a major deletion
target at 9p21 in bladder cancer. Hum Mol Genet 4:1569-1577, 1995.
35. Wu Q, Possati L, Montesi M, et al: Growth arrest and suppression of
tumorigenicity of bladder-carcinoma cell lines induced by the P16/CDKN2
(p16INK4a, MTS1) gene and other loci on human chromosome 9. Int J Cancer
36. Sparkes RS, Sparkes MC, Wilson MG, et al: Regional assignment of genes
for human esterase D and retinoblastoma to chromosome band 13q14. Science
37. Logothetis CJ, Xu HJ, Ro JY, et al: Altered expression of retinoblastoma
protein and known prognostic variables in locally advanced bladder cancer. J
Natl Cancer Inst 84:1256-1261, 1992.
38. Cordon-Cardo C, Wartinger D, Petrylak D, et al: Altered expression of the
retinoblastoma gene product: Prognostic indicator in bladder cancer. J Natl
Cancer Inst 84:1251-1256, 1992.
39. Xu HJ, Cairns P, Hu SX, et al: Loss of RB protein expression in primary
bladder cancer correlates with loss of heterozygosity at the RB locus and tumor
progression. Int J Cancer 53:781-784, 1993.
40. Markl I, Salem CE, Jones PA: Molecular biology of bladder cancer, in
Vogelzang N, Scardino PT, Shipley WU, et al (eds): Comprehensive Textbook of
Genitourinary Oncology, 2nd ed, pp 298-309. Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams
& Wilkins, 2000.
41. Olumi AF, Tsai YC, Nichols PW, et al: Allelic loss of chromosome 17p
distinguishes high-grade from low-grade transitional cell carcinomas of the
bladder. Cancer Res 50:7081-7083, 1990.
42. Sidransky D, Von Eschenbach A, Tsai YC, et al: Identification of p53 gene
mutations in bladder cancers and urine samples. Science 252:706-709, 1991.
43. Williamson MP, Elder PA, Knowles MA: The spectrum of TP53 mutations in
bladder carcinoma. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 9:108-118, 1994.
44. Cordon-Cardo C, Dalbagni G, Saez GT, et al: p53 mutations in human
bladder cancer: Genotypic vs phenotypic patterns. Int J Cancer 56:347-353, 1994.
45. Esrig D, Spruck CHd, Nichols PW, et al: p53 nuclear protein accumulation
correlates with mutations in the p53 gene, tumor grade, and stage in bladder
cancer. Am J Pathol 143:1389-1397, 1993.
46. Mareel MM, Van Roy FM, Bracke ME: How and when do tumor cells
metastasize? Crit Rev Oncog 4:559-594, 1993.
47. Markl ID, Jones PA: Presence and location of TP53 mutation determines
pattern of CDKN2A/ARF pathway inactivation in bladder cancer. Cancer Res
48. Spruck CH 3rd, Ohneseit PF, Gonzalez-Zulueta M, et al: Two molecular
pathways to transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Cancer Res 54:784-788,
49. Cordon-Cardo C: Mutations of cell cycle regulators. Biological and
clinical implications for human neoplasia. Am J Pathol 147:545-560, 1995.
50. Fung YK, Murphree AL, T’Ang A, et al: Structural evidence for the
authenticity of the human retinoblastoma gene. Science 236:1657-1661, 1987.
51. Presti JC Jr, Reuter VE, Galan T, et al: Molecular genetic alterations in
superficial and locally advanced human bladder cancer. Cancer Res 51:5405-5409,
52. Cote RJ, Chatterjee SJ: Molecular determinants of outcome in bladder
cancer. Cancer Sci Am 5:2-15, 1999.
53. Ishikawa J, Xu HJ, Hu SX, et al: Inactivation of the retinoblastoma gene
in human bladder and renal cell carcinomas. Cancer Res 51:5736-5743, 1991.
54. Hollstein M, Sidransky D, Vogelstein B, et al: p53 mutations in human
cancers. Science 253:49-53, 1991.
55. Lane DP: Cancer. p53, guardian of the genome. Nature 358:15-16, 1992.
56. Vet JA, Bringuier PP, Schaafsma HE, et al: Comparison of P53 protein
overexpression with P53 mutation in bladder cancer: Clinical and biologic
aspects. Lab Invest 73:837-843, 1995.
57. Dalbagni G, Cordon-Cardo C, Reuter V, et al: Tumor suppressor gene
alterations in bladder carcinoma: Translational correlates to clinical practice.
Surg Oncol Clin N Am 4:231-240, 1995.
58. Esrig D, Elmajian D, Groshen S, et al: Accumulation of nuclear p53 and
tumor progression in bladder cancer. N Engl J Med 331:1259-1264, 1994.
59. Sarkis AS, Dalbagni G, Cordon-Cardo C, et al: Nuclear overexpression of
p53 protein in transitional cell bladder carcinoma: A marker for disease
progression. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:53-59, 1993.
60. Greenblatt MS, Bennett WP, Hollstein M, et al: Mutations in the p53 tumor
suppressor gene: Clues to cancer etiology and molecular pathogenesis. Cancer Res
61. Cote RJ, Dunn MD, Chatterjee SJ, et al: Elevated and absent pRb
expression is associated with bladder cancer progression and has cooperative
effects with p53. Cancer Res 58:1090-1094, 1998.
62. Cordon-Cardo C, Zhang ZF, Dalbagni G, et al: Cooperative effects of p53
and pRB alterations in primary superficial bladder tumors. Cancer Res
63. Parker SB, Eichele G, Zhang P, et al: p53-independent expression of
p21Cip1 in muscle and other terminally differentiating cells. Science
64. Stein JP, Ginsberg DA, Grossfeld GD, et al: Effect of p21WAF1/CIP1
expression on tumor progression in bladder cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst
90:1072-1079, 1998 (see comment in J Natl Cancer Inst 90:1028-1029,1998).
65. Serrano M, Hannon GJ, Beach D: A new regulatory motif in cell-cycle
control causing specific inhibition of cyclin D/CDK4. Nature 366:704-707, 1993
(see comment in Nature 366:634, 1993).
66. Gonzalez-Zulueta M, Bender CM, Yang AS, et al: Methylation of the 5' CpG
island of the p16/CDKN2 tumor suppressor gene in normal and transformed human
tissues correlates with gene silencing. Cancer Res 55:4531-4535, 1995.
67. Chin L, Pomerantz J, DePinho RA: The INK4a/ARF tumor suppressor: One genetwo
productstwo pathways. Trends Biochem Sci 23:291-296, 1998.
68. Quelle DE, Zindy F, Ashmun RA, et al: Alternative reading frames of the
INK4a tumor suppressor gene encode two unrelated proteins capable of inducing
cell cycle arrest. Cell 83:993-1000, 1995.
69. Orlow I, LaRue H, Osman I, et al: Deletions of the INK4A gene in
superficial bladder tumors: Association with recurrence. Am J Pathol
70. Pomerantz J, Schreiber-Agus N, Liegeois NJ, et al: The Ink4a tumor
suppressor gene product, p19Arf, interacts with Mdm2 and neutralizes MDM2’s
inhibition of p53. Cell 92:713-723, 1998.
71. Momand J, Wu HH, Dasgupta G: MDM2master regulator of the p53 tumor
suppressor protein. Gene 242:15-29, 2000.
72. Lianes P, Orlow I, Zhang ZF, et al: Altered patterns of MDM2 and TP53
expression in human bladder cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 86:1325-1330, 1994 (see
comment in J Natl Cancer Inst 86:1265-1266, 1994).
73. Folkman J: Tumor angiogenesis. Adv Cancer Res 43:175-203, 1985.
74. Folkman J: The role of angiogenesis in tumor growth. Semin Cancer Biol
75. Hanahan D, Folkman J: Patterns and emerging mechanisms of the angiogenic
switch during tumorigenesis. Cell 86:353-364, 1996.
76. Volpert OV, Dameron KM, Bouck N: Sequential development of an angiogenic
phenotype by human fibroblasts progressing to tumorigenicity. Oncogene
77. Polverini PJ: The pathophysiology of angiogenesis. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med
78. Blood CH, Zetter BR: Tumor interactions with the vasculature:
Angiogenesis and tumor metastasis. Biochim Biophys Acta 1032:89-118, 1990.
79. Folkman J: What is the role of angiogenesis in metastasis from cutaneous
melanoma? Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 23:361-363, 1987.
80. Weidner N, Folkman J, Pozza F, et al: Tumor angiogenesis: A new
significant and independent prognostic indicator in early-stage breast
carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 84:1875-1887, 1992 (see comments in J Natl Cancer
Inst 84:1850-1851, 1992; 85:674-676, 1993; 86:635-636, 1994).
81. Weidner N, Carroll PR, Flax J, et al: Tumor angiogenesis correlates with
metastasis in invasive prostate carcinoma. Am J Pathol 143:401-409, 1993.
82. Barnhill RL, Piepkorn MW, Cochran AJ, et al: Tumor vascularity,
proliferation, and apoptosis in human melanoma micrometastases and
macrometastases. Arch Dermatol 134:991-994, 1998 (see comment in Arch Dermatol
83. Bochner BH, Cote RJ, Weidner N, et al: Angiogenesis in bladder cancer:
Relationship between microvessel density and tumor prognosis. J Natl Cancer Inst
84. Jaeger TM, Weidner N, Chew K, et al: Tumor angiogenesis correlates with
lymph node metastases in invasive bladder cancer. J Urol 154:69-71, 1995.
85. Dickinson AJ, Fox SB, Persad RA, et al: Quantification of angiogenesis as
an independent predictor of prognosis in invasive bladder carcinomas. Br J Urol
86. Chopin DK, Caruelle JP, Colombel M, et al: Increased immunodetection of
acidic fibroblast growth factor in bladder cancer, detectable in urine. J Urol
87. Ravery V, Jouanneau J, Gil Diez S, et al: Immunohistochemical detection
of acidic fibroblast growth factor in bladder transitional cell carcinoma. Urol
Res 20:211-214, 1992.
88. Nguyen M, Watanabe H, Budson AE, et al: Elevated levels of the angiogenic
peptide basic fibroblast growth factor in urine of bladder cancer patients. J
Natl Cancer Inst 85:241-242, 1993.
89. Bochner B, McHugh R, Spitz A, et al: Basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF)
in bladder cancer: Elevated urinary levels predict pathologic stage. J Urol
90. Campbell SC, Volpert OV, Ivanovich M, et al: Molecular mediators of
angiogenesis in bladder cancer. Cancer Res 58:1298-1304, 1998.
91. O’Brien T, Cranston D, Fuggle S, et al: Different angiogenic pathways
characterize superficial and invasive bladder cancer. Cancer Res 55:510-513,
92. Crew JP, O’Brien T, Bradburn M, et al: Vascular endothelial growth
factor is a predictor of relapse and stage progression in superficial bladder
cancer. Cancer Res 57:5281-5285, 1997.
93. O’Brien TS, Fox SB, Dickinson AJ, et al: Expression of the angiogenic
factor thymidine phosphorylase/platelet-derived endothelial cell growth factor
in primary bladder cancers. Cancer Res 56:4799-4804, 1996.
94. Rosen EM, Goldberg ID: Regulation of angiogenesis by scatter factor. EXS
95. Eder IE, Stenzl A, Hobisch A, et al: Transforming growth factors-beta 1
and beta 2 in serum and urine from patients with bladder carcinoma. J Urol
156:953-957, 1996 (see comment in J Urol 156:961,1996).
96. Andrawis R, Contrino, J, Lindquist, RR, et al: Interleukin-8 expression
and human bladder cancer: In situ and in vitro expression of IL-8 by human
bladder cancer cells. J Urol 157:28, 1997.
97. Gohji K, Fujimoto N, Fujii A, et al: Prognostic significance of
circulating matrix metalloproteinase-2 to tissue inhibitor of
metalloproteinases-2 ratio in recurrence of urothelial cancer after complete
resection. Cancer Res 56:3196-3198,1996.
98. Gohji K, Fujimoto N, Komiyama T, et al: Elevation of serum levels of
matrix metalloproteinase-2 and -3 as new predictors of recurrence in patients
with urothelial carcinoma. Cancer 78:2379-2387, 1996.
99. Chodak GW, Scheiner CJ, Zetter BR: Urine from patients with
transitional-cell carcinoma stimulates migration of capillary endothelial cells.
N Engl J Med 305:869-874, 1981.
100. O’Brien TS, Harris AL: Angiogenesis in urological malignancy. Br J
Urol 76:675-682, 1995.
101. Crew JP, O’Brien T, Bicknell R, et al: Urinary vascular endothelial
growth factor and its correlation with bladder cancer recurrence rates. J Urol
102. Williams SG, Feng A, Skinner DG, et al: Urine levels of vascular
endothelial growth factor predict recurrence in bladder cancer. J Urol
103. Sato K, Sasaki R, Ogura Y, et al: Expression of vascular endothelial
growth factor gene and its receptor (flt-1) gene in urinary bladder cancer.
Tohoku J Exp Med 185:173-184, 1998.
104. O’Brien T, Cranston D, Fuggle S, et al: Two mechanisms of basic
fibroblast growth factor-induced angiogenesis in bladder cancer. Cancer Res
105. D’Amato RJ, Loughnan MS, Flynn E, et al: Thalidomide is an inhibitor
of angiogenesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:4082-4085, 1994.
106. Voest EE, Kenyon BM, O’Reilly MS, et al: Inhibition of angiogenesis in
vivo by interleukin 12. J Natl Cancer Inst 87:581-586, 1995 (see comment in J
Natl Cancer Inst 87:581-586, 1995).
107. O’Reilly MS, Holmgren L, Shing Y, et al: Angiostatin: A novel
angiogenesis inhibitor that mediates the suppression of metastases by a Lewis
lung carcinoma. Cell 79:315-328, 1994 (see comment in Cell 70:185-188, 1994).
108. Sheibani N, Frazier WA: Down-regulation of platelet endothelial cell
adhesion molecule-1 results in thrombospondin-1 expression and concerted
regulation of endothelial cell phenotype. Mol Biol Cell 9:701-713, 1998.
109. Bochner B, Windham CQ, Pao MM, et al: Overexpression of thrombospondin-1
inhibits bladder tumor growth: A novel therapy for invasive bladder cancer. J
Urol (abstract)159:282, 1998.
110. Saito T, Kimura M, Kawasaki T, et al: Correlation between integrin alpha
5 expression and the malignant phenotype of transitional cell carcinoma. Br J
Cancer 73:327-331, 1996.
111. O’Reilly MS, Holmgren L, Chen C, et al: Angiostatin induces and
sustains dormancy of human primary tumors in mice. Nat Med 2:689-692, 1996.
112. Iruela-Arispe ML, Bornstein P, Sage H: Thrombospondin exerts an
antiangiogenic effect on cord formation by endothelial cells in vitro. Proc Natl
Acad Sci USA 88:5026-5030, 1991.
113. Good DJ, Polverini PJ, Rastinejad F, et al: A tumor suppressor-dependent
inhibitor of angiogenesis is immunologically and functionally indistinguishable
from a fragment of thrombospondin. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 87:6624-6628, 1990.
114. Grossfeld GD, Shi SR, Ginsberg DA, et al: Immunohistochemical
detection of thrombospondin-1 in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue. J
Histochem Cytochem 44:761-766, 1996.
115. Grossfeld GD, Ginsberg DA, Stein JP, et al: Thrombospondin-1 expression
in bladder cancer: Association with p53 alterations, tumor angiogenesis, and
tumor progression. J Natl Cancer Inst 89:219-227, 1997.
116. Joseph A, Weiss GH, Jin L, et al: Expression of scatter factor in human
bladder carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 87:372-377,1995.
117. Gohji K, Fujimoto N, Ohkawa J, et al: Imbalance between serum matrix
metalloproteinase-2 and its inhibitor as a predictor of recurrence of urothelial
cancer. Br J Cancer 77:650-655, 1998.
118. Folkman J: Seminars in Medicine of the Beth Israel Hospital, Boston.
Clinical applications of research on angiogenesis. N Engl J Med 333:1757-1763,
1995 (see comment in N Engl J Med 334:920-921, 1996).
119. Boehm T, Folkman J, Browder T, et al: Antiangiogenic therapy of
experimental cancer does not induce acquired drug resistance. Nature
120. Folkman J: Angiogenesis and angiogenesis inhibition: An overview. EXS
121. Schlaeppi JM, Wood JM: Targeting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)
for anti-tumor therapy, by anti-VEGF neutralizing monoclonal antibodies or by
VEGF receptor tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. Cancer Metastasis Rev 18:473-481,
122. Siemeister G, Martiny-Baron G, Marme D: The pivotal role of VEGF in
tumor angiogenesis: Molecular facts and therapeutic opportunities. Cancer
Metastasis Rev 17:241-248, 1998.
123. Bichler KH, Wechsel HW: The problematic nature of metastasized renal
cell carcinoma. Anticancer Res 19:1463-1466, 1999.
124. Campbell SC, Bochner BH: Angiogenesis in bladder cancer. Mol Urol
125. Montie JE, Meyers SE: Defining the ideal tumor marker for prostate
cancer. Urol Clin North Am 24:247-252, 1997.