PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 18, 2026Journal of Personalized Medicine0 citationsOpen Access

Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: An Update on Current Diagnostic Modalities and Emerging Biomarkers

View Full Paper
KKKonstantinos KapriniotisWhipps Cross University HospitalILIoannis LoufopoulosThe Royal Free HospitalMSMohammad SharifWhipps Cross University Hospital

Key Points

  • This review aims to highlight limitations in current diagnostic methods for upper tract urothelial carcinoma and identify promising biomarkers.
  • Conducted a narrative review of literature on diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for upper tract urothelial carcinoma.
  • Analyzed strengths and weaknesses of existing diagnostic modalities.
  • CT urogram has sensitivity and specificity over 90% but struggles with smaller lesions.
  • Urine cytology is specific for high-grade carcinoma but has low sensitivity, leading to unnecessary ureteroscopies.
  • FISH technology and urine DNA methylation markers show promise but require further validation in larger studies.
  • Circulation tumour DNA presents potential for risk stratification post-surgery, though larger studies are needed.

Abstract

Introduction: Upper tract urothelial carcinoma is a rare disease with variable prognosis depending on the stage and grade at diagnosis. Current modalities are far from perfect in diagnosis and risk stratification. In this setting, there is an urgent need for diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers to overcome these limitations. Methods: We carried out a narrative review of the literature searching for research articles on diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UC) and underlined the limitations of current diagnostic modalities. Results: CT urogram (CTU) is the imaging modality of choice in suspected upper tract UC with sensitivity and specificity exceeding 90% but with limitations in smaller lesions. Urine cytology has an excellent specificity for high-grade UC but is limited by low sensitivity leading to a high number of diagnostic ureteroscopies with significant associated risks. Adjuncts such as Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH) technology and urine DNA methylation markers have shown promising results but need further validation in large cohorts of upper tract UC. Finally, circulation tumour DNA (ctDNA) is a novel approach with great potential in risk stratification and monitoring of minimal residual disease post radical surgery; however, larger prospective studies are required to validate its role similarly to the recent bladder UC trials. Conclusions: There is an urgent need for non-invasive biomarkers that can reliably replace diagnostic ureteroscopies, identify high-risk/invasive disease and select patients for radical surgery or kidney sparing procedures.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kapriniotis et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69e320af40886becb653fd57https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm16040220
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper