Published in

American Society of Clinical Oncology, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 15_suppl(31), p. 5074-5074, 2013

DOI: 10.1200/jco.2013.31.15_suppl.5074

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Use of [-2]proPSA and prostate health index (phi) to improve the diagnostic accuracy of prostate cancer compared to t-PSA and %f-PSA in young men (≤ 65 years old).

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

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

Abstract

5074 Background: Although prostate-specific antigen (tPSA) screening reduced prostate cancer (PCa) mortality recent recommendations do not endorse PSA-screening due to overdiagnosis and overtreatment and the resulting harm afflicted to patients. Screening studies showed the maximum benefit in young men < 65 years of age. tPSA and percent free PSA (%fPSA) lack specifity in the diagnosis of PCa. [-2]proPSA and the prostate health index (phi) improved this diagnostic specifity. Markers to diagnose clinicaly relevant cancers in young men are needed. Methods: The clinical performance of [-2]proPSA and phi was evaluated in a multicenter study. A total of 1362 patients scheduled for initial or repeated prostate biopsy (668 with, 694 without PCa, each ≥ 10 core biopsies) were recruited in 4 different sites based on PSA level 1.6 – 8.0 ng/mL WHO-calibrated (2-10 ng/mL classically calibrated). Serum samples taken prior to digital rectal examination (DRE) were measured for the concentration of tPSA, fPSA and [-2]proPSA with Beckman Coulter immunoassays on Access 2 or DxI800 instruments. Phi was calculated as [-2]proPSA/fPSA*√tPSA. Results: In univariate analysis [-2]proPSA/fPSA (%[-2]proPSA) and phi were the best predictors of PCa detection in patients at initial biopsy (AUC: 0,72 and 0,73) and repeated biopsy (AUC: 0,74 and 0,74). Analysis of the data for men ≤ 65 years of age (n=593) showed that %[-2]proPSA and phi significantly improved PCa dectection (AUC: 0,72 and 0,73) as compared with tPSA (AUC: 0,54) or %fPSA (AUC: 0,62). In the detection of significant PCa (based on PRIAS criteria) %[-2]proPSA and phi demonstrated the best performance in the whole cohort and in young men (≤ 65) years as well (AUC 0,68 and 0,73). Conclusions: This multicenter study showed that [-2]proPSA and phi have a superior clinical performance in detecting PCa in the PSA range of 2-10 ng/mL compared with tPSA and %fPSA at initial and repeated biopsies. This superiority is maintained for the detection of PCa in young men (≤ 65 years of age).