Clinical utility of the PCA3 urine assay in European men scheduled for repeat biopsy

Screening for Prostate Cancer-Beyond Total PSA, Utilization of Novel Biomarkers

Urology has been beset by several major trends that have shifted the entire paradigm for prostate cancer screening. These stem from a backlash against overdiagnosis and overtreatment due to prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening efforts and have led national societies to modify their guidelines. More importantly, the public outcry has shifted the focus of early detection from an effort to diagnose any and all prostate cancers to an effort to diagnose clinically significant prostate cancers at an early stage. This review provides an update on contemporary biomarkers for prostate cancer that may be used to supplement PSA-based screening approaches.

Factors predicting progression to castrate-resistant prostate cancer in patients with advanced prostate cancer receiving long-term androgen-deprivation therapy

OBJECTIVES

To assess time to progression to castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and factors influencing longer-term outcomes in patients receiving androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) in an extension to the Triptocare study (NCT01020448). This is pertinent as the Triptocare study did not show that urinary prostate cancer antigen-3 (PCA3) score was a reliable marker of cancer stage in advanced prostate cancer and was not useful for assessing response 6 months after initiation of ADT with triptorelin 22.5 mg.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An international, multicentre, non-interventional, observational, longitudinal, prospective study involving patients from the Triptocare study. CRPC status of patients was collected for up to 3 years from ADT initiation. Patient treatment and assessments were at the investigator's discretion. Co-primary endpoints were rate of CRPC at 3 years after initiating ADT and the median time to CRPC. An exploratory endpoint was the association of Triptocare baseline variables (including TMPRSS2-ERG and PCA3 scores) and PCA3 score at Triptocare last value available with CRPC onset.

RESULTS

Of the 325 patients in the Triptocare study safety population, 180 patients were enrolled in the Triptocare LT study (102 received continuous and 78 received intermittent ADT). CRPC rates at 3 years were 24/102 (23.5%) and 6/78 (7.7%) patients in the continuous and intermittent ADT groups, respectively. The median time to CRPC was not reached for either group. PCA3 score status at baseline was the only variable associated with a higher risk of progression to CRPC in both the intermittent and continuous ADT groups; compared with a baseline PCA3 score of ≥35, a PCA3 score below the level of quantification had a hazard ratio (HR) of 20.04 ([95% confidence interval (CI) 2.71-148.34] and a HR of 9.44 [95% CI 2.39-37.27], respectively). Baseline metastatic disease and testosterone level were additionally associated with progression to CRPC in the continuous ADT population (HR 5.20, 95% CI 1.68-16.06 and HR 0.995, 95% CI 0.991-0.999, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In men with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer, a PCA3 score of ≥35 at the time of initiating ADT may predict a lower risk of developing CRPC in the following 3 years.

Prostate-specific antigen-based population screening for prostate cancer: current status in Japan and future perspective in Asia

In Western countries, clinical trials on prostate cancer screening demonstrated a limited benefit for patient survival. In the Asia-Pacific region, including Japan, the rate of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing remains very low compared with Western countries, and the benefits of population-based screening remain unclear. This review describes the current status of population screening and diagnosis for prostate cancer in Japan and discusses the efficacy of population screening for the Asian population. Since the 1990s, screening systems have been administered by each municipal government in Japan, and decreases in the prostate cancer mortality rate are expected in some regions where the exposure rate to PSA screening has increased markedly. A population-based screening cohort revealed that the proportion of metastatic disease in cancer detected by screening gradually decreased according to the increased exposure rate, and a decreasing trend in the proportion of cancer with high serum PSA levels after population screening was started. The prognosis of the prostate cancer detected by population screening was demonstrated to be more favorable than those diagnosed outside of the population screening. Recent results in screening cohorts demonstrated the efficacy of PSA. These recent evidences regarding population-based screening in Japan may contribute to establishing the optimal prostate cancer screening system in Asian individuals.

Immunochemical Assays and Nucleic-Acid Detection Techniques for Clinical Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality and the most common cancer in men in Europe, North America, and some parts of Africa. The established methods for detecting PCa are normally based on tests using Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) in blood, Prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) in urine and tissue Alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase (AMACR) as tumour markers in patient samples. Prior to the introduction of PSA in clinics, prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) was the most widely used biomarker. An early diagnosis of PCa through the detection of these biomarkers requires the availability of simple, reliable, cost-effective and robust techniques. Immunoassays and nucleic acid detection techniques have experienced unprecedented growth in recent years and seem to be the most promising analytical tools. This growth has been driven in part by the surge in demand for near-patient-testing systems in clinical diagnosis. This article reviews immunochemical assays, and nucleic-acid detection techniques that have been used to clinically diagnose PCa.

Using gene expression from urine sediment to diagnose prostate cancer: development of a new multiplex mRNA urine test and validation of current biomarkers

Background

Additional accurate non-invasive biomarkers are needed in the clinical setting to improve prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis. Here we have developed a new and improved multiplex mRNA urine test to detect prostate cancer (PCa). Furthermore, we have validated the PCA3 urinary transcript and some panels of urinary transcripts previously reported as useful diagnostic biomarkers for PCa in our cohort.

Methods

Post-prostatic massage urine samples were prospectively collected from PCa patients and controls. Expression levels of 42 target genes selected from our previous studies and from the literature were studied in 224 post-prostatic massage urine sediments by quantitative PCR. Univariate logistic regression was used to identify individual PCa predictors. A variable selection method was used to develop a multiplex biomarker model. Discrimination was measured by ROC curve AUC for both, our model and the previously published biomarkers.

Results

Seven of the 42 genes evaluated (PCA3, ELF3, HIST1H2BG, MYO6, GALNT3, PHF12 and GDF15) were found to be independent predictors for discriminating patients with PCa from controls. We developed a four-gene expression signature (HIST1H2BG, SPP1, ELF3 and PCA3) with a sensitivity of 77 % and a specificity of 67 % (AUC = 0.763) for discriminating between tumor and control urines. The accuracy of PCA3 and previously reported panels of biomarkers is roughly maintained in our cohort.

Conclusions

Our four-gene expression signature outperforms PCA3 as well as previously reported panels of biomarkers to predict PCa risk. This study suggests that a urinary biomarker panel could improve PCa detection. However, the accuracy of the panels of urinary transcripts developed to date, including our signature, is not high enough to warrant using them routinely in a clinical setting.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2127-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Direct and multiplex quantification of protein biomarkers in serum samples using an immuno-magnetic platform

A direct and ultrasensitive multiplex assay using an immuno-magnetic platform has been developed for the quantification of trace amounts of circulating cancer-associated antigens in serum.

A direct and ultrasensitive multiplex assay using an immuno-magnetic platform has been developed for the quantification of trace amounts of circulating cancer-associated antigens in serum. The detection is based on the specific immuno-interactions among the target antigen, detection antibody and capture antibody that is immobilized on the surface of magnetic nanoparticles. The sandwiched immuno-assembly is then labelled with turn-on fluorophores and detected with a fluorescence imaging system. To afford a high signal-to-noise ratio, three turn-on fluorophores with unique optical properties have been designed and synthesized to label the target antigens. The developed assay has achieved a remarkable LOD down to the femto-molar regime without sample pre-treatment. This versatile assay can efficiently differentiate the target antigen from a protein matrix and simultaneously quantify multiple cancer-associated antigens, for instance, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and prostate specific antigen (PSA) using only 6 μL of serum sample in an hour. This novel system has a high applicability to serve as a universal and useful tool for early disease diagnostics.

Non-coding RNAs in Prostate Cancer: From Discovery to Clinical Applications

Prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease for which the molecular mechanisms are still not fully elucidated. Prostate cancer research has traditionally focused on genomic and epigenetic alterations affecting the proteome, but over the last decade non-coding RNAs, especially microRNAs, have been recognized to play a key role in prostate cancer progression. A considerable number of individual microRNAs have been found to be deregulated in prostate cancer and their biological significance elucidated in functional studies. This review will delineate the current advances regarding the involvement of microRNAs and their targets in prostate cancer biology as well as their potential usage in the clinical management of the disease. The main focus will be on microRNAs contributing to initiation and progression of prostate cancer, including androgen signalling, cellular plasticity, stem cells biology and metastatic processes. To conclude, implications on potential future microRNA-based therapeutics based on the recent advances regarding the interplay between microRNAs and their targets are discussed.

Urine TMPRSS2: ERG Fusion Transcript as a Biomarker for Prostate Cancer: Literature Review

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common male malignancies. Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is one of the most valuable biomarkers in tumor biology and remains the standard marker in detecting and monitoring PCa. However, the high number of serum PSA false positive and false negative results make the identification of novel biomarkers extremely welcome to improve our diagnostic accuracy in detecting PCa and distinguishing the aggressive from the indolent ones. In this study, we analyzed the current role of urinary gene fusion transcripts involving v-ets erythroblastosis virus E26 oncogene homolog, commonly known as ERG, and the androgen-regulated gene transmembrane protease, serine 2 (TMPRSS2), as a biomarker for PCa. Used as a single marker, urinary TMPRSS2:ERG has low sensitivity but high specificity. However, its combination with the other urinary marker PCa antigen 3 (PCA3) has been reported to provide high specificity and sensitivity. Finally, a commercially available assay combining serum PSA with urinary PCA3 and TMPRSS2:ERG provides a 90% specificity and 80% sensitivity in diagnosing PCa. Urinary TMPRSS2:ERG also seems to be indicative of PCa aggressiveness upon biopsy. Should these findings be confirmed in larger studies, urinary TMPRSS2:ERG might become a valuable test not only for diagnosing PCa but also for distinguishing the aggressive tumors from the indolent ones.

Biomarkers for prostate cancer: present challenges and future opportunities

Prostate cancer (PCa) has variable biological potential with multiple treatment options. A more personalized approach, therefore, is needed to better define men at higher risk of developing PCa, discriminate indolent from aggressive disease and improve risk stratification after treatment by predicting the likelihood of progression. This may improve clinical decision-making regarding management, improve selection for active surveillance protocols and minimize morbidity from treatment. Discovery of new biomarkers associated with prostate carcinogenesis present an opportunity to provide patients with novel genetic signatures to better understand their risk of developing PCa and help forecast their clinical course. In this review, we examine the current literature evaluating biomarkers in PCa. We also address current limitations and present several ideas for future studies.

Clinical evaluation of prostate cancer gene 3 score in diagnosis among Chinese men with prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is the second most common diagnosed cancer in men. Due to the low specificity of current diagnosis methods for detecting prostate cancer, identification of new biomarkers is highly desirable. The study was conducted to determine the clinical utility of the prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) assay to predict biopsy-detected cancers in Chinese men.

METHODS

The study included men who had a biopsy at The Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital of Shanghai Jiao Tong University from January 2013 to December 2013. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue blocks were used to test PCA3 and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) mRNA. The diagnostic accuracy of the PCA3 score for predicting a positive biopsy outcome was studied using sensitivity and specificity, and it was compared with PSA.

RESULTS

The probability of a positive biopsy increased with increasing PCA3 scores. The mean PCA3 score was significantly higher in men with prostate cancer (198.03, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 74.79-321.27) vs benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) (84.31, 95 % CI 6.47-162.15, P < 0.01). The PCA3 score (cutoff 35) had a sensitivity of 85.7 % and specificity of 62.5 %. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed higher areas under the ROC curve for the PCA3 score vs PSA, but without statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased PCA3 in biopsy tissue correlated with prostate cancer and the PCA3 assay may improve the diagnosis efficacy as the PCA3 score being independent of PSA level. The diagnostic significance of urinary PCA3 testing should be explored in future study to determine the prediction value in guiding biopsy decision as the clinical relevance of current study was limited for PCA3 testing based on biopsy tissue in a limited number of Chinese men.

Biomarker detection technologies and future directions

Biomarkers play a vital role in disease detection and treatment follow-up. It is important to note that diseases in the early stage are typically treated with the greatest probability of success. However, due to various technical difficulties in current technologies for the detection of biomarkers, the potential of biomarkers is not explored completely. Therefore, the developments of technologies, which can enable the accurate detection of prostate cancer at an early stage with simple, experimental protocols are highly inevitable. This critical review evaluates the current methods and technologies used in the detection of biomarkers. The aim of this article is to provide a comprehensive review covering the advantages and disadvantages of the biomarker detection methods. Future directions for the development of technologies to achieve highly selective and sensitive detection of biomarkers for point-of-care applications are also commented on.

Assessment of long-term outcomes associated with urinary prostate cancer antigen 3 and TMPRSS2:ERG gene fusion at repeat biopsy

BACKGROUND

In men with clinically localized prostate cancer who have undergone at least 1 previous negative biopsy and have elevated serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, long-term health outcomes associated with the assessment of urinary prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) and the transmembrane protease, serine 2 (TMPRSS2):v-ets erythroblastosis virus E26 oncogene homolog (avian) (ERG) gene fusion (T2:ERG) have not been investigated previously in relation to the decision to recommend a repeat biopsy.

METHODS

The authors performed a decision analysis using a decision tree for men with elevated PSA levels. The probability of cancer was estimated using the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator (version 2.0). The use of PSA alone was compared with the use of PCA3 and T2:ERG scores, with each evaluated independently, in combination with PSA to trigger a repeat biopsy. When PCA3 and T2:ERG score evaluations were used, predefined thresholds were established to determine whether the patient should undergo a repeat biopsy. Biopsy outcomes were defined as either positive (with a Gleason score of <7, 7, or >7) or negative. Probabilities and estimates of 10-year overall survival and 15-year cancer-specific survival were derived from previous studies and a literature review. Outcomes were defined as age-dependent and Gleason score-dependent 10-year overall and 15-year cancer-specific survival rates and the percentage of biopsies avoided.

RESULTS

Incorporating the PCA3 score (biopsy threshold, 25; generated based on the urine PCA3 level normalized to the amount of PSA messenger RNA) or the T2:ERG score (biopsy threshold, 10; based on the urine T2:ERG level normalized to the amount of PSA messenger RNA) into the decision to recommend repeat biopsy would have avoided 55.4% or 64.7% of repeat biopsies for the base-case patient, respectively, and changes in the 10-year survival rate were only 0.93% or 1.41%, respectively. Multi-way sensitivity analyses suggested that these results were robust with respect to the model parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of PCA3 or T2:ERG testing for repeat biopsy decisions can substantially reduce the number of biopsies without significantly affecting 10-year survival.

Prognostic and predictive biomarkers in prostate cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the leading causes of cancer death among males, especially in more developed countries. Diagnosis is often achieved at an early stage of the disease with prostate biopsy, following a screening test showing elevated serum levels of prostate-specific antigen or a positive digital rectal examination. Early detection of PCa has led to a substantial decline in the number of metastatic patients. However, the prostate-specific antigen screening test has proved to be a double-edged sword so far, as it also accounts for PCa overdiagnosis. Due to the variability of PCa features, accurate prognosis of PCa patients is very important for determining treatment options. Therefore, this review focuses on the most promising prognostic and predictive biomarkers in PCa, which are likely to play a pivotal role, alone or in panels, in the personalized medicine era that has recently emerged.

RNA biomarkers to facilitate the identification of aggressive prostate cancer

A large number of men are diagnosed with prostate cancer each year, but many will not experience morbidity or mortality as a result of their cancers. Therefore, biomarkers for prostate cancer are necessary to carefully select patients for initial diagnostic biopsy or to facilitate care decisions for men who have already been diagnosed with prostate cancer. RNA-based approaches to biomarker discovery allow the investigation of non-coding RNAs, gene fusion transcripts, splice variants, and multi-gene expression panels in tissue, urine, or blood as opportunities to improve care decisions. This review focuses on RNA biomarkers that are available as commercial assays, and therefore already available for potential clinical use, as well as providing an overview of newer RNA biomarkers that are in earlier stages of clinical development.

Molecular Updates in Prostate Cancer

A wide array of molecular markers and genomic signatures, reviewed in this article, may soon be used as adjuncts to currently established screening strategies, prognostic parameters, and early detection markers. Markers of genetic susceptibility to PCA, recurrent epigenetic and genetic alterations, including ETS gene fusions, PTEN alterations, and urine-based early detection marker PCA3, are discussed. Impact of recent genome-wide assessment on our understanding of key pathways of PCA development and progression and their potential clinical implications are highlighted.

Diagnosis of prostate cancer via nanotechnological approach

Prostate cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths among the Caucasian adult males in Europe and the USA. Currently available diagnostic strategies for patients with prostate cancer are invasive and unpleasant and have poor accuracy. Many patients have been overly or underly treated resulting in a controversy regarding the reliability of current conventional diagnostic approaches. This review discusses the state-of-the-art research in the development of novel noninvasive prostate cancer diagnostics using nanotechnology coupled with suggested diagnostic strategies for their clinical implication.

Current biomarkers for diagnosing of prostate cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is mostly detected by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as one of the most widely used tumor markers. But PSA is limited with its low specificity. The prostate health index (phi) can improve specificity over percent free and total PSA and correlates with aggressive cancer. The urinary PCA3 also shows its utility to detect PCa but its correlation with aggressiveness and the low sensitivity at high values are limitations. While the detection of alterations of the androgen-regulated TMPRSS2 and ETS transcription factor genes in tissue of ˜50% of all PCa patients was one research milestone, the urinary assay should only be used in combination with PCA3. Both US FDA-approved markers phi and PCA3 perform equally.

Current early diagnostic biomarkers of prostate cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) has become to have the highest incidence and the second mortality rate in western countries, affecting men's health to a large extent. Although prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was discovered to help diagnose the cancer in an early stage for decades, its specificity is relative low, resulting in unnecessary biopsy for healthy people and over-treatment for patients. Thus, it is imperative to identify more and more effective biomarkers for early diagnosis of PCa in order to distinguish patients from healthy populations, which helps guide an early treatment to lower disease-related mortality by noninvasive or minimal invasive approaches. This review generally describes the current early diagnostic biomarkers of PCa in addition to PSA and summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of these biomarkers.

Urinary biomarkers for prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The field of urology has been beset by several major trends that have affected the early detection of prostate cancer. These stem primarily from a backlash against overdiagnosis due to prostate specific antigen-based screening efforts and are epitomized by the US Preventive Services Task Force giving prostate specific antigen-based prostate cancer screening a 'D' recommendation. Consequently, the active surveillance strategy for low-risk prostate cancer has become commonplace, leading many to ask how best to follow these patients. More importantly, this public outcry has shifted the focus of early detection from an effort to diagnose any and all prostate cancers to an effort to diagnose only 'high-risk' cancer. Along with a trend for minimally invasive procedures, these forces have challenged the early detection field to more efficiently identify clinically significant prostate cancers at an early stage while limiting the number of biopsies.

RECENT FINDINGS

With US Food and Drug Administration approval, prostate cancer antigen 3 has emerged as the first bona-fide urinary biomarker for prostate cancer. Using the same platform, investigators have developed a second urinary test based on TMPRSS2:erg fusion. Recent literature supports the use of these biomarkers as a combined panel that improves risk evaluation in the setting of prostate cancer detection. Early works for applying urinary biomarkers for active surveillance are underway. Other biomarkers in the pipeline will require further prevalidation and validation work.

SUMMARY

Recent literature would support that urinary biomarkers have a clear role to supplement risk evaluation for men undergoing prostate biopsy and for prognostication.

Addressing the need for repeat prostate biopsy: new technology and approaches

No guidelines currently exist that address the need for rebiopsy in patients with a negative diagnosis of prostate cancer on initial biopsy sample analysis. Accurate diagnosis of prostate cancer in these patients is often complicated by continued elevation of serum PSA levels that are suggestive of prostate cancer, resulting in a distinct management challenge. Following negative initial findings of biopsy sample analysis, total serum PSA levels and serum PSA kinetics are ineffective indicators of a need for a repeat biopsy; therefore, patients suspected of having prostate cancer might undergo several unnecessary biopsy procedures. Several alternative strategies exist for identifying men who might be at risk of prostate cancer despite negative findings of biopsy sample analysis. Use of other serum PSA-related measurements enables more sensitive and specific diagnosis and can be combined with knowledge of clinicopathological features to improve outcomes. Other options include the FDA-approved Progensa(®) test and prostate imaging using MRI. Newer tissue-based assays that measure methylation changes in normal prostate tissue are currently being developed. A cost-effective strategy is proposed in order to address this challenging clinical scenario, and potential directions of future studies in this area are also described.

Prostate health index and prostate cancer gene 3 score but not percent-free Prostate Specific Antigen have a predictive role in differentiating histological prostatitis from PCa and other nonneoplastic lesions (BPH and HG-PIN) at repeat biopsy

OBJECTIVE

To determine if prostate health index (PHI), prostate cancer antigen gene 3 (PCA3) score, and percentage of free prostate-specific antigen (%fPSA) may be used to differentiate asymptomatic acute and chronic prostatitis from prostate cancer (PCa), benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), and high-grade prostate intraepithelial neoplasia (HG-PIN) in patients with elevated PSA levels and negative findings on digital rectal examination at repeat biopsy (re-Bx).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this prospective study, 252 patients were enrolled, undergoing PHI, PCA3 score, and %fPSA assessments before re-Bx. We used 3 multivariate logistic regression models to test the PHI, PCA3 score, and %fPSA as risk factors for prostatitis vs. PCa, vs. BPH, and vs. HG-PIN. All the analyses were performed for the whole patient cohort and for the "gray zone" of PSA (4-10ng/ml) cohort (171 individuals).

RESULTS

Of the 252 patients, 43 (17.1%) had diagnosis of PCa. The median PHI was significantly different between men with a negative biopsy and those with a positive biopsy (34.9 vs. 48.1, P<0.001), as for the PCA3 score (24 vs. 54, P<0.001) and %fPSA (11.8% vs. 15.8%, P = 0.012). The net benefit of using PCA3 and PHI to differentiate prostatitis and PCa was moderate, although it extended to a good range of threshold probabilities (40%-100%), whereas that from using %fPSA was negligible: this pattern was reported for the whole population as for the "gray zone" PSA cohort.

CONCLUSION

In front of a good diagnostic performance of all the 3 biomarkers in distinguishing negative biopsy vs. positive biopsy, the clinical benefit of using the PCA3 score and PHI to estimate prostatitis vs. PCa was comparable. PHI was the only determinant for prostatitis vs. BPH, whereas no biomarkers could differentiate prostate inflammation from HG-PIN.

Development, validation and evaluation of an instrument for active monitoring of men with clinically localised prostate cancer: systematic review, cohort studies and qualitative study

Background

Active surveillance [(AS), sometimes called active monitoring (AM)],is a National Institute for Health and Care Excellence-recommended management option for men with clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa). It aims to target radical treatment only to those who would benefit most. Little consensus exists nationally or internationally about safe and effective protocols for AM/AS or triggers that indicate if or when men should move to radical treatment.

Objective

The aims of this project were to review how prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has been used in AM/AS programmes; to develop and test the validity of a new model for predicting future PSA levels; to develop an instrument, based on PSA, that would be acceptable and effective for men and clinicians to use in clinical practice; and to design a robust study to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the instrument.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted to investigate how PSA is currently used to monitor men in worldwide AM/AS studies. A model for PSA change with age was developed using Prostate testing for cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) data and validated using data from two PSA-era cohorts and two pre-PSA-era cohorts. The model was used to derive 95% PSA reference ranges (PSARRs) across ages. These reference ranges were used to predict the onset of metastases or death from PCa in one of the pre-PSA-era cohorts. PSARRs were incorporated into an active monitoring system (AMS) and demonstrated to 18 clinicians and 20 men with PCa from four NHS trusts. Qualitative interviews investigated patients’ and clinicians’ views about current AM/AS protocols and the acceptability of the AMS within current practice.

Results

The systematic review found that the most commonly used triggers for clinical review of PCa were PSA doubling time (PSADT) < 3 years or PSA velocity (PSAv) > 1 ng/ml/year. The model for PSA change (developed using ProtecT study data) predicted PSA values in AM/AS cohorts within 2 ng/ml of observed PSA in up to 79% of men. Comparing the three PSA markers, there was no clear optimal approach to alerting men to worsening cancer. The PSARR and PSADT markers improved the modelc-statistic for predicting death from PCa by 0.11 (21%) and 0.13 (25%), respectively, compared with using diagnostic information alone [PSA, age, tumour stage (T-stage)]. Interviews revealed variation in clinical practice regarding eligibility and follow-up protocols. Patients and clinicians perceive current AM/AS practice to be framed by uncertainty, ranging from uncertainty about selection of eligible AM/AS candidates to uncertainty about optimum follow-up protocols and thresholds for clinical review/radical treatment. Patients and clinicians generally responded positively to the AMS. The impact of the AMS on clinicians’ decision-making was limited by a lack of data linking AMS values to long-term outcomes and by current clinical practice, which viewed PSA measures as one of several tools guiding clinical decisions in AM/AS. Patients reported that they would look to clinicians, rather than to a tool, to direct decision-making.

Limitations

The quantitative findings were severely hampered by a lack of clinical outcomes or events (such as metastases). The qualitative findings were limited through reliance on participants’ reports of practices and recollections of events rather than observations of actual interactions.

Conclusions

Patients and clinicians found that the instrument provided additional, potentially helpful, information but were uncertain about the current usefulness of the risk model we developed for routine management. Comparison of the model with other monitoring strategies will require clinical outcomes from ongoing AM/AS studies.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Prostate cancer in Asia: A collaborative report

The incidence of prostate cancer (PCa) within Asian population used to be much lower than in the Western population; however, in recent years the incidence and mortality rate of PCa in some Asian countries have grown rapidly. This collaborative report summarized the latest epidemiology information, risk factors, and racial differences in PCa diagnosis, current status and new trends in surgery management and novel agents for castration-resistant prostate cancer. We believe such information would be helpful in clinical decision making for urologists and oncologists, health-care ministries and medical researchers.

Diagnostic performance of expression of PCA3, Hepsin and miR biomarkers inejaculate in combination with serum PSA for the detection of prostate cancer

BACKGROUND AND METHODS

Here, we report on the evaluation of the diagnostic performance of ejaculate-derived PCA3, Hepsin, and miRNAs to complement serum PSA to detect prostate cancer. cDNA was prepared from 152 candidate specimens following RNA isolation and amplification for PSA, PCA3 and Hepsin qPCR, with 66 having adequate RNA for all three assays. Small RNA sequencing and examination of PCa-associated miRNAs miR-200b, miR-200c, miR-375 and miR-125b was performed on 20 specimens. We compared findings from prostate biopsies using D'Amico and PRIAS classifications and in relation to whole gland histopathology following radical prostatectomy. Multivariate logistic regression modeling and clinical risk (incorporating standard clinicopathological variables) were performed for all ejaculate-based markers.

RESULTS

While Hepsin alone was not of predictive value, the Hepsin:PCA3 ratio together with serum PSA, expressed as a univariate composite score based on multivariate logistic regression, was shown to be a better predictor than PSA alone of prostate cancer status (AUC 0.724 vs. 0.676) and risk, using D'Amico (AUC 0.701 vs. 0.680) and PRIAS (AUC 0.679 vs. 0.659) risk stratification criteria as classified using prostate biopsies. It was also possible to analyse a subgroup of patients for miRNA expression with miR-200c (AUC 0.788) and miR-375 (AUC 0.758) showing best single marker performance, while a combination of serum PSA, miR-200c, and miR-125b further improved prediction for prostate cancer status when compared to PSA alone determined by biopsy (AUC 0.869 vs. 0.672; P < 0.05), and risk (D'Amico/PRIAS) as well as by radical prostatectomy histology (AUC 0.809 vs. 0.690). For prostate cancer status by biopsy, at a sensitivity of 90%, the specificity of the test increased from 11% for PSA alone to 67% for a combination of PSA, miR-200c, and miR-125b.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show that use of a combination of different types of genetic markers in ejaculate together with serum PSA are at least as sensitive as those reported in DRE urine. Furthermore, a combination of serum PSA and selected miRNAs improved prediction of prostate cancer status. This approach may be helpful in triaging patients for MRI and biopsy, when confirmed by larger studies.

Validation of proposed prostate cancer biomarkers with gene expression data: a long road to travel

Biomarkers are important for early detection of cancer, prognosis, response prediction, and detection of residual or relapsing disease. Special attention has been given to diagnostic markers for prostate cancer since it is thought that early detection and surgery might reduce prostate cancer-specific mortality. The use of prostate-specific antigen, PSA (KLK3), has been debated on the base of cohort studies that show that its use in preventive screenings only marginally influences mortality from prostate cancer. Many groups have identified alternative or additional markers, among which PCA3, in order to detect early prostate cancer through screening, to distinguish potentially lethal from indolent prostate cancers, and to guide the treatment decision. The large number of markers proposed has led us to the present study in which we analyze these indicators for their diagnostic and prognostic potential using publicly available genomic data. We identified 380 markers from literature analysis on 20,000 articles on prostate cancer markers. The most interesting ones appeared to be claudin 3 (CLDN3) and alpha-methysacyl-CoA racemase highly expressed in prostate cancer and filamin C (FLNC) and keratin 5 with highest expression in normal prostate tissue. None of the markers proposed can compete with PSA for tissue specificity. The indicators proposed generally show a great variability of expression in normal and tumor tissue or are expressed at similar levels in other tissues. Those proposed as prognostic markers distinguish cases with marginally different risk of progression and appear to have a clinically limited use. We used data sets sampling 152 prostate tissues, data sets with 281 prostate cancers analyzed by microarray analysis and a study of integrated genomics on 218 cases to develop a multigene score. A multivariate model that combines several indicators increases the discrimination power but does not add impressively to the information obtained from Gleason scoring. This analysis of 10 years of marker research suggests that diagnostic and prognostic testing is more difficult in prostate cancer than in other neoplasms and that we must continue to search for better candidates.

PCA3 in prostate cancer and tumor aggressiveness detection on 407 high-risk patients: a National Cancer Institute experience

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common male cancer in Europe and the US. The early diagnosis relies on prostate specific antigen (PSA) serum test, even if it showed clear limits. Among the new tests currently under study, one of the most promising is the prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3), a non-coding mRNA whose level increases up to 100 times in PCa tissues when compared to normal tissues. With the present study we contribute to the validation of the clinical utility of the PCA3 test and to the evaluation of its prognostic potential.

METHODS

407 Italian men, with two or more PCa risk factors and at least a previous negative biopsy, entering the Urology Unit of Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, were tested for PCA3, total PSA (tPSA) and free PSA (fPSA and f/tPSA) tests. Out of the 407 men enrolled, 195 were positive for PCa and 114 of them received an accurate staging with evaluation of the Gleason score (Gs). Then, the PCA3 score was correlated to biopsy outcome, and the diagnostic and prognostic utility were evaluated.

RESULTS

Out of the 407 biopsies performed after the PCA3 test, 195 (48%) resulted positive for PCa; the PCA3 score was significantly higher in this population (p < 0.0001) differently to tPSA (p = 0.87). Moreover, the PCA3 test outperformed the f/tPSA (p = 0.01). The sensitivity (94.9) and specificity (60.1) of the PCA3 test showed a better balance for a threshold of 35 when compared to 20, even if the best result was achieved considering a cutoff of 51, with sensitivity and specificity of 82.1% and 79.3%, respectively. Finally, comparing values of the PCA3 test between two subgroups with increasing Gs (Gs ≤ 6 versus Gs ≥ 7) a significant association between PCA3 score and Gs was found (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The PCA3 test showed the best diagnostic performance when compared to tPSA and f/tPSA, facilitating the selection of high-risk patients that may benefit from the execution of a saturation prostatic biopsy. Moreover, the PCA3 test showed a prognostic value, as higher PCA3 score values are associated to a greater tumor aggressiveness.

LncRNA2Function: a comprehensive resource for functional investigation of human lncRNAs based on RNA-seq data

Background

The GENCODE project has collected over 10,000 human long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) genes. However, the vast majority of them remain to be functionally characterized. Computational investigation of potential functions of human lncRNA genes is helpful to guide further experimental studies on lncRNAs.

Results

In this study, based on expression correlation between lncRNAs and protein-coding genes across 19 human normal tissues, we used the hypergeometric test to functionally annotate a single lncRNA or a set of lncRNAs with significantly enriched functional terms among the protein-coding genes that are significantly co-expressed with the lncRNA(s). The functional terms include all nodes in the Gene Ontology (GO) and 4,380 human biological pathways collected from 12 pathway databases. We successfully mapped 9,625 human lncRNA genes to GO terms and biological pathways, and then developed the first ontology-driven user-friendly web interface named lncRNA2Function, which enables researchers to browse the lncRNAs associated with a specific functional term, the functional terms associated with a specific lncRNA, or to assign functional terms to a set of human lncRNA genes, such as a cluster of co-expressed lncRNAs. The lncRNA2Function is freely available at http://mlg.hit.edu.cn/lncrna2function.

Conclusions

The LncRNA2Function is an important resource for further investigating the functions of a single human lncRNA, or functionally annotating a set of human lncRNAs of interest.

Projecting Benefits and Harms of Novel Cancer Screening Biomarkers: A Study of PCA3 and Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

New biomarkers for early detection of cancer must pass through several phases of development. Early phases provide information on diagnostic properties but not on population benefits and harms. Prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) is a promising prostate cancer biomarker still in early development. We use simulation modeling to project the impact of adding PCA3 to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer detection and mortality in the United States.

METHODS

We used data from a recent study of PCA3 in men referred for prostate biopsy to extend an existing simulation model of PSA growth, disease progression, and survival. We specified several PSA-PCA3 strategies designed to improve specificity and reduce overdiagnosis. Using these strategies to screen a cohort of men biennially between ages 50 and 74, we projected true- and false-positive tests, overdiagnoses, and lives saved relative to a PSA-based strategy with a cutoff of 4.0 ng/mL for biopsy referral.

RESULTS

We identified several PSA-PCA3 strategies that substantially reduced false-positive tests and overdiagnoses while preserving the majority of lives saved. PCA3>35 for biopsy referral in men with PSA between 4.0 and 10.0 ng/mL retained 85% of lives saved while approximately halving false positives and reducing overdiagnoses by 25%.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding PCA3 to PSA screening can significantly reduce adverse screening outcomes. Strategies can be identified that preserve most of the lives saved relative to PSA-based screening.

IMPACT

Simulation modeling provides advance projections of population outcomes of new screening biomarkers and may help guide early detection research.

Prostate Specific Antigen as a Tumor Marker in Prostate Cancer: Biochemical and Clinical Aspects

In this chapter the use of prostate specific antigen (PSA) as a tumor marker for prostate cancer is discussed. The chapter provides an overview of biological and clinical aspects of PSA. The main drawback of total PSA (tPSA) is its lack of specificity for prostate cancer which leads to unnecessary biopsies. Moreover, PSA-testing poses a risk of overdiagnosis and subsequent overtreatment. Many PSA-based markers have been developed to improve the performance characteristics of tPSA. As well as different molecular subforms of tPSA, such as proPSA (pPSA) and free PSA (fPSA), and PSA derived kinetics as PSA-velocity (PSAV) and PSA-doubling time (PSADT). The prostate health index (phi), PSA-density (PSAD) and the contribution of non PSA-based markers such as the urinary transcripts of PCA3 and TMPRSS-ERG fusion are also discussed. To enable further risk stratification tumor markers are often combined with clinical data (e.g. outcome of DRE) in so-called nomograms. Currently the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the detection and staging of prostate cancer is being explored.

Can urinary PCA3 supplement PSA in the early detection of prostate cancer?

PURPOSE

Given the limited sensitivity and specificity of prostate-specific antigen (PSA), its widespread use as a screening tool has raised concerns for the overdiagnosis of low-risk and the underdiagnosis of high-grade prostate cancer. To improve early-detection biopsy decisions, the National Cancer Institute conducted a prospective validation trial to assess the diagnostic performance of the prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) urinary assay for the detection of prostate cancer among men screened with PSA.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 859 men (mean age, 62 years) from 11 centers scheduled for a diagnostic prostate biopsy between December 2009 and June 2011 were enrolled. The primary outcomes were to assess whether PCA3 could improve the positive predictive value (PPV) for an initial biopsy (at a score > 60) and the negative predictive value (NPV) for a repeat biopsy (at a score < 20).

RESULTS

For the detection of any cancer, PPV was 80% (95% CI, 72% to 86%) in the initial biopsy group, and NPV was 88% (95% CI, 81% to 93%) in the repeat biopsy group. The addition of PCA3 to individual risk estimation models (which included age, race/ethnicity, prior biopsy, PSA, and digital rectal examination) improved the stratification of cancer and of high-grade cancer.

CONCLUSION

These data independently support the role of PCA3 in reducing the burden of prostate biopsies among men undergoing a repeat prostate biopsy. For biopsy-naive patients, a high PCA3 score (> 60) significantly increases the probability that an initial prostate biopsy will identify cancer.

The PCA3 test for guiding repeat biopsy of prostate cancer and its cut-off score: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The specificity of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for early intervention in repeat biopsy is unsatisfactory. Prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) may be more accurate in outcome prediction than other methods for the early detection of prostate cancer (PCa). However, the results were inconsistent in repeated biopsies. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the role of PCA3 in outcome prediction. A systematic bibliographic search was conducted for articles published before April 2013, using PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Embase and other databases from health technology assessment agencies. The quality of the studies was assessed on the basis of QUADAS criteria. Eleven studies of diagnostic tests with moderate to high quality were selected. A meta-analysis was carried out to synthesize the results. The results of the meta-analyses were heterogeneous among studies. We performed a subgroup analysis (with or without inclusion of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) and atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP)). Using a PCA3 cutoff of 20 or 35, in the two sub-groups, the global sensitivity values were 0.93 or 0.80 and 0.79 or 0.75, specificities were 0.65 or 0.44 and 0.78 or 0.70, positive likelihood ratios were 1.86 or 1.58 and 2.49 or 1.78, negative likelihood ratios were 0.81 or 0.43 and 0.91 or 0.82 and diagnostic odd ratios (ORs) were 5.73 or 3.45 and 7.13 or 4.11, respectively. The areas under the curve (AUCs) of the summary receiver operating characteristic curve were 0.85 or 0.72 and 0.81 or 0.69, respectively. PCA3 can be used for repeat biopsy of the prostate to improve accuracy of PCa detection. Unnecessary biopsies can be avoided by using a PCa cutoff score of 20.

A panel of DNA methylation markers reveals extensive methylation in histologically benign prostate biopsy cores from cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Men with a negative first prostate biopsy will undergo one or more additional biopsies if they remain at high suspicion of prostate cancer. To date, there are no diagnostic tests capable of identifying patients at risk for a positive diagnosis with the predictive power needed to eliminate unnecessary repeat biopsies. Efforts to develop clinical tests using the epigenetic signature of cores recovered from first biopsies have been limited to a few markers and lack the sensitivity and specificity needed for widespread clinical adoption.

METHODS

We developed methylation-specific quantitative polymerase chain reaction assays for a panel of 24 markers that are preferentially methylated in prostate cancer. We modified the bisulfite conversion conditions to allow the integration of the methylation information from multiple markers. We determined the methylation status of the 24 markers in 213 prostate biopsy cores from 104 patients, 37 prostate cancer patients and 67 controls. We performed logistic regression on combinations of markers as well as the entire panel of 24 markers to identify the best candidates for a diagnostic test.

RESULTS

The marker panel differentiated between cancer cores and benign cores from non-cancer patients with 100% sensitivity and 97% specificity. Furthermore, the panel detected significant methylation in benign cores from prostate cancer patients that was not present in controls. Using methylation of 5 out of 24 to define a cancer case, the analysis of a single benign biopsy core identified 62% of prostate cancer patients undergoing repeat biopsies. ROC curve analysis showed that markers commonly methylated in benign cores from cancer patients are the best candidates for a diagnostic test. The results suggest that 5 to 10 markers will be needed to achieve optimal predictive power.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that epigenetic field effects differ significantly between cancer patients and controls. Their detection in benign biopsy cores can form the basis of diagnostic tests to identify patients in need of repeat biopsies, reducing the cost of continued PCA screening by up to 40%. They could also be used to identify prostate cancer patients with low grade disease who are likely candidates for active surveillance or focal therapy.

DNA methylation profiling reveals novel diagnostic biomarkers in renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the tenth most commonly diagnosed cancer in the United States. While it is usually lethal when metastatic, RCC is successfully treated with surgery when tumors are confined to the kidney and have low tumor volume. Because most early stage renal tumors do not result in symptoms, there is a strong need for biomarkers that can be used to detect the presence of the cancer as well as to monitor patients during and after therapy.

METHODS

We examined genome-wide DNA methylation alterations in renal cell carcinomas of diverse histologies and benign adjacent kidney tissues from 96 patients.

RESULTS

We observed widespread methylation differences between tumors and benign adjacent tissues, particularly in immune-, G-protein coupled receptor-, and metabolism-related genes. Additionally, we identified a single panel of DNA methylation biomarkers that reliably distinguishes tumor from benign adjacent tissue in all of the most common kidney cancer histologic subtypes, and a second panel does the same specifically for clear cell renal cell carcinoma tumors. This set of biomarkers were validated independently with excellent performance characteristics in more than 1,000 tissues in The Cancer Genome Atlas clear cell, papillary, and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma datasets.

CONCLUSIONS

These DNA methylation profiles provide insights into the etiology of renal cell carcinoma and, most importantly, demonstrate clinically applicable biomarkers for use in early detection of kidney cancer.

Dietary lutein modulates growth and survival genes in prostate cancer cells

Lutein is a carotenoid pigment present in fruits and vegetables that has anti-inflammatory and antitumor properties. In this study, we examined the effect of lutein on proliferation and survival-associated genes in prostate cancer (PC-3) cells. We found that in vitro culture of PC-3 cells with lutein induced mild decrease in proliferation that improved in combination treatment with peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ) agonists and other chemotherapeutic agents. Flow cytometry analyses showed that lutein improved drug-induced cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in prostate cancer. Gene array and quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction analyses showed that lutein altered the expression of growth and apoptosis-associated biomarker genes in PC-3 cells. These findings highlight that lutein modulates the expression of growth and survival-associated genes in prostate cancer cells.

The added value of percentage of free to total prostate-specific antigen, PCA3, and a kallikrein panel to the ERSPC risk calculator for prostate cancer in prescreened men

BACKGROUND

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing has limited accuracy for the early detection of prostate cancer (PCa).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the value added by percentage of free to total PSA (%fPSA), prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3), and a kallikrein panel (4k-panel) to the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) multivariable prediction models: risk calculator (RC) 4, including transrectal ultrasound, and RC 4 plus digital rectal examination (4+DRE) for prescreened men.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Participants were invited for rescreening between October 2007 and February 2009 within the Dutch part of the ERSPC study. Biopsies were taken in men with a PSA level ≥3.0 ng/ml or a PCA3 score ≥10. Additional analyses of the 4k-panel were done on serum samples.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Outcome was defined as PCa detectable by sextant biopsy. Receiver operating characteristic curve and decision curve analyses were performed to compare the predictive capabilities of %fPSA, PCA3, 4k-panel, the ERSPC RCs, and their combinations in logistic regression models.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

PCa was detected in 119 of 708 men. The %fPSA did not perform better univariately or added to the RCs compared with the RCs alone. In 202 men with an elevated PSA, the 4k-panel discriminated better than PCA3 when modelled univariately (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.78 vs. 0.62; p=0.01). The multivariable models with PCA3 or the 4k-panel were equivalent (AUC: 0.80 for RC 4+DRE). In the total population, PCA3 discriminated better than the 4k-panel (univariate AUC: 0.63 vs. 0.56; p=0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the multivariable model with PCA3 (AUC: 0.73) versus the model with the 4k-panel (AUC: 0.71; p=0.18). The multivariable model with PCA3 performed better than the reference model (0.73 vs. 0.70; p=0.02). Decision curves confirmed these patterns, although numbers were small.

CONCLUSIONS

Both PCA3 and, to a lesser extent, a 4k-panel have added value to the DRE-based ERSPC RC in detecting PCa in prescreened men.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We studied the added value of novel biomarkers to previously developed risk prediction models for prostate cancer. We found that inclusion of these biomarkers resulted in an increase in predictive ability.

Biomarkers and personalized risk stratification for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common neoplasia among men in developed countries and a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality. PCa is a very heterogeneous disease, both clinically and biologically. Currently, it is difficult to stratify patients into risk groups that entail different disease management. Therefore, a personalized view of this disease is mandatory, through the development of new and more accurate biomarkers that may help clinicians to stratify patients according to threat that PCa poses for each patient. Hence, this review focuses on recent developments of molecular and immunohistochemical biomarkers for PCa risk stratification that might enable a personalized approach to PCa patients. However, despite the increasing amount of available data, there is also an urgent need to translate the most promising biomarkers for clinical use through large multicenter validation trials. Ultimately, these will contribute for an improved clinical management of PCa patients.