Published in

Oxford University Press, Clinical Chemistry, 1(59), p. 280-288, 2013

DOI: 10.1373/clinchem.2012.195560

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Comparative Assessment of Urinary Prostate Cancer Antigen 3 and TMPRSS2:ERG Gene Fusion with the Serum [-2]Proprostate-Specific Antigen-Based Prostate Health Index for Detection of Prostate Cancer

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

BACKGROUND We compared urinary prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3), transmembrane protease, serine 2 (TMPRSS2):v-ets erythroblastosis virus E26 oncogene homolog (avian) (ERG) gene fusion (T2:ERG), and the serum [−2]proprostate-specific antigen ([−2]proPSA)-based prostate health index (Phi) for predicting biopsy outcome. METHODS Serum samples and first-catch urine samples were collected after digital rectal examination (DRE) from consented outpatients with PSA 0.5–20 μg/L who were scheduled for prostate biopsy. The PCA3 score (PROGENSA PCA3, Hologic Gen-Probe) and T2:ERG score (Hologic Gen-Probe) were determined. Measurements of serum PSA, free PSA, and [−2]proPSA (Beckman Coulter) were performed, and the percentages of free PSA (%fPSA) and Phi ([−2]proPSA/fPSA × √PSA) were determined. RESULTS Of 246 enrolled men, prostate cancer (PCa) was diagnosed in 110 (45%) and there was no evidence of malignancy (NEM) in 136 (55%). A first set of biopsies was performed in 136 (55%) of all men, and 110 (45%) had ≥1 repeat biopsies. PCA3, Phi, and T2:ERG differed significantly between men with PCa and NEM, and these markers showed the largest areas under the ROC curve (AUCs) (0.74, 0.68, and 0.63, respectively). PCA3 had the largest AUC of all parameters, albeit not statistically different from Phi. Phi showed somewhat lower specificities than PCA3 at 90% sensitivity. Combination of both markers enhanced diagnostic power with modest AUC gains of 0.01–0.04. Although PCA3 had the highest AUC in the repeat-biopsy cohort, the highest AUC for Phi was observed in DRE-negative patients with PSA in the 2–10 μg/L range. CONCLUSIONS PCA3 and Phi were superior to the other evaluated parameters but their combination gave only moderate enhancements in diagnostic accuracy for PCa at first or repeat prostate biopsy.