BACKGROUND: Current diagnoses of urinary tract infection (UTI) by standard urine culture (SUC) has significant limitations in sensitivity, especially for fastidious organisms, and the ability to identify organisms in polymicrobial infections. The significant rate of both SUC \"negative\" or \"mixed flora/contamination\" results in UTI cases and the high prevalence of asymptomatic bacteriuria indicate the need for an accurate diagnostic test to help identify true UTI cases. This study aimed to determine if infection-associated urinary biomarkers can differentiate definitive UTI cases from non-UTI controls.
METHODS: Midstream clean-catch voided urine samples were collected from asymptomatic volunteers and symptomatic subjects ≥ 60 years old diagnosed with a UTI in a urology specialty setting. Microbial identification and density were assessed using a multiplex PCR/pooled antibiotic susceptibility test (M-PCR/P-AST) and SUC. Three biomarkers [neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), and Interleukins 8 and 1β (IL-8, and IL-1β)] were also measured via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Definitive UTI cases were defined as symptomatic subjects with a UTI diagnosis and positive microorganism detection by SUC and M-PCR, while definitive non-UTI cases were defined as asymptomatic volunteers.
RESULTS: We observed a strong positive correlation (R2 > 0.90; p < 0.0001) between microbial density and the biomarkers NGAL, IL-8, and IL-1β for symptomatic subjects. Biomarker consensus criteria of two or more positive biomarkers had sensitivity 84.0%, specificity 91.2%, positive predictive value 93.7%, negative predictive value 78.8%, accuracy 86.9%, positive likelihood ratio of 9.58, and negative likelihood ratio of 0.17 in differentiating definitive UTI from non-UTI cases, regardless of non-zero microbial density. NGAL, IL-8, and IL-1β showed a significant elevation in symptomatic cases with positive microbe identification compared to asymptomatic cases with or without microbe identification. Biomarker consensus exhibited high accuracy in distinguishing UTI from non-UTI cases.
CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that positive infection-associated urinary biomarkers NGAL, IL-8, and IL-1β, in symptomatic subjects with positive SUC and/or M-PCR results was associated with definitive UTI cases. A consensus criterion with ≥ 2 of the biomarkers meeting the positivity thresholds showed a good balance of sensitivity (84.0%), specificity (91.2%), and accuracy (86.9%). Therefore, this biomarker consensus is an excellent supportive diagnostic tool for resolving the presence of active UTI, particularly if SUC and M-PCR results disagree.

According to the recent American Urological Association (AUA) guideline on hematuria, patients are stratified into groups with low, intermediate, and high risk of urothelial carcinoma (UC). These risk groups are based on clinical factors and do not incorporate urine-based tumor markers.
To evaluate whether a urine-based genomic assay improves the redefined AUA risk stratification for hematuria.
We selected patients with complete biomarker status, as assessed on urinary DNA, from a previously collected prospective Dutch hematuria cohort (n = 838). Patients were stratified into the AUA risk categories on the basis of sex, age, and type of hematuria. Biomarker status included mutation status for the FGFR3, TERT, and HRAS genes, and methylation status for the OTX1, ONECUT2, and TWIST1 genes.
The primary endpoint was the diagnostic model performance for different hematuria risk groups. Further analyses assessed the pretest and post-test UC probability in the hematuria subgroups using a Fagan nomogram.
Overall, 65 patients (7.8%) were classified as low risk, 106 (12.6%) as intermediate risk, and 667 (79.6%) as high risk. The UC incidence differed significantly between the gross hematuria (21%, 98/457) and microscopic hematuria (4%, 14/381) groups (p < 0.001). All cancer cases were in the high-risk group, which had UC incidence of 16.8% (112/667). Application of the diagnostic model revealed robust performance among all risk groups (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.929-0.971). Depending on the risk group evaluated, a negative urine assay was associated with post-test UC probability of 0.3-2%, whereas a positive urine assay was associated with post-test UC probability of 31-42%.
This study shows the value that a urine-based genomic assay adds to the AUA guideline stratification for patients with hematuria. It seems justified to safely withhold cystoscopy for patients with AUA low risk who have a negative urine assay. In addition, evaluation should be expedited for patients with AUA intermediate or high risk and a positive urine assay.
Patients who have blood in their urine (hematuria) can be classified as having low, intermediate, or high risk of having cancer in their urinary tract. We found that use of a urine-based genetic test improves the accuracy of predicting which patients are most likely to have cancer. Patients with a negative test may be able to avoid invasive tests, while further tests could be prioritized for patients with a positive test.