Chronic prostatitis does not influence urinary PCA3 score

Electrochemical LAMP-based assay for detection of RNA biomarkers in prostate cancer

Current molecular diagnostics of prostate cancer relies on detection of elevated levels of PSA protein in serum, but its specificity has been questioned due to its higher levels also in non-malignant prostate diseases. A long non-coding RNA biomarker, PCA3, demonstrated excellent specificity for prostate cancer, and thus has become an interesting alternative to PSA monitoring. Its detection utilizes mostly reverse transcription PCR with optical detection, making the protocol longer and more expensive. To avoid PCR, we have developed an electrochemical assay coupled with LAMP, an isothermal amplification technique showing high sensitivities at constant temperatures and shorter reaction times. We amplified PCA3 RNA as well as PSA mRNA (serving as a control), hybridized LAMP products on magnetic beads and measured them with chronoamperometry at carbon electrode chips. We show good sensitivity and specificity for both biomarkers in prostate cancer cell lines, and successful detection of PCA3 in clinical samples, i.e., urine samples from 11 prostate cancer patients and 7 healthy controls, where we obtained excellent correlation with clinical data. This is to our knowledge a first such attempt to apply electrochemistry to determine two RNA biomarkers directly in urine samples of prostate cancer patients in a minimally invasive diagnostics format.

The Percentage of Free PSA and Urinary Markers Distinguish Prostate Cancer from Benign Hyperplasia and Contribute to a More Accurate Indication for Prostate Biopsy

The main advantage of urinary biomarkers is their noninvasive character and the ability to detect multifocal prostate cancer (CaP). We have previously implemented a quadruplex assay of urinary markers into clinical practice (PCA3, AMACR, TRPM8 and MSMB with KLK3 normalization). In this study, we aimed to validate it in a larger cohort with serum PSA 2.5-10 ng/mL and test other selected transcripts and clinical parameters, including the percentage of free prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (% free PSA) and inflammation. In the main cohort of 299 men, we tested the quadruplex transcripts. In a subset of 146 men, we analyzed additional transcripts (CD45, EPCAM, EZH2, Ki67, PA2G4, PSGR, RHOA and TBP). After a prostate massage, the urine was collected, RNA isolated from a cell sediment and qRT-PCR performed. Ct values of KLK3 (i.e., PSA) were strongly correlated with Ct values of other genes which play a role in CaP (i.e., PCA3, AMACR, TRPM8, MSMB and PSGR). AMACR, PCA3, TRPM8 and EZH2 mRNA expression, as well as % free PSA, were significantly different for BPH and CaP. The best combined model (% free PSA plus PCA3 and AMACR) achieved an AUC of 0.728 in the main cohort. In the subset of patients, the best AUC 0.753 was achieved for the combination of PCA3, % free PSA, EPCAM and PSGR. PCA3 mRNA was increased in patients with inflammation, however, this did not affect the stratification of patients indicated for prostate biopsy. In conclusion, the percentage of free PSA and urinary markers contribute to a more accurate indication for prostate biopsy.

Impact of Histopathological Prostate Inflammation on Urine-Based Prostate Cancer Prediction Using the Prostate Cancer Gene 3 Score

INTRODUCTION

The Prostate Cancer gene 3 (PCA3) urine test has gained importance in the diagnostic workup of prostate cancer (PC). Limited evidence suggests that PCA3 is not altered in the presence of inflammation.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of histological inflammation on PCA3.

METHODS

PCA3 was evaluated in patients prior to prostate biopsy (n = 193) and to radical prostatectomy (n = 197). In patients without PC, inflammation was assessed and quantified by individual scores integrating grade and extent. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to assess the impact of inflammation grade on PCA3.

RESULTS

The PCA3 scores prior to prostatectomy were lower (median 45) than those before positive biopsy (57; p = 0.008). Of 101 negative biopsies, 78% showed inflammation. The median PCA3 scores in the groups with no inflammation and with maximum grade 1 (n = 22), 2 (n = 38), and 3 (n = 19) inflammation were 45, 38, 27, and 25 (p = 0.016). The multivariate models revealed a decrease in PCA3 proportional to the grade and extent of inflammation (p < 0.04 each).

CONCLUSIONS

The present data imply that the PCA3 score decreases in the presence of inflammation, which is relevant, for instance, to testing after a recently performed biopsy. In general, inflammation should be regarded as a factor putatively influencing PCA3 and other available and upcoming PC tests.

The long non-coding RNA PCA3: an update of its functions and clinical applications as a biomarker in prostate cancer

Prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) is an overexpressed prostate long non-coding RNA (lncRNA), transcribed from an intronic region at the long arm of human chromosome 9q21–22. It has been described that PCA3 modulates prostate cancer (PCa) cell survival through modulating androgen receptor (AR) signaling, besides controlling the expression of several androgen responsive and cancer-related genes, including epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) markers and those regulating gene expression and cell signaling. Also, PCA3 urine levels have been successfully used as a PCa diagnostic biomarker. In this review, we have highlighted recent findings regarding PCA3, addressing its gene structure, putative applications as a biomarker, a proposed origin of this lncRNA, roles in PCa biology and expression patterns. We also updated data regarding PCA3 interactions with cancer-related miRNAs and expression in other tissues and diseases beyond the prostate. Altogether, literature data indicate aberrant expression and dysregulated activity of PCA3, suggesting PCA3 as a promising relevant target that should be even further evaluated on its applicability for PCa detection and management.

The evolution of long noncoding RNA acceptance in prostate cancer initiation, progression, and its clinical utility in disease management

CONTEXT

It is increasingly evident that non-protein-coding regions of the genome can give rise to transcripts that form functional layers of the cancer genome. One of most abundant classes in these regions is long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs). They have gained increasing attention in prostate cancer (PCa) and paved the way for a greater understanding of these cryptic regulators in cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To review current research exploring the functional biology of lncRNAs in PCa over the past three decades.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review was performed using PubMed to search for reports with terms "long noncoding RNA", "prostate", and "cancer" over the past 30 yr (1988-2018).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We comprehensively surveyed the literature collected and summarise experiments leading to the characterisation of lncRNAs in PCa. A historical timeline of lncRNA identification is described, where each lncRNA is categorised mechanistically and within the primary areas of carcinogenesis: tumour risk and initiation, tumour promotion, tumour suppression, and tumour treatment resistance. We describe select lncRNAs that exemplify these areas. We also review whether these lncRNAs have a clinical utility in PCa diagnosis, prognosis, and prediction, and as therapeutic targets.

CONCLUSIONS

The biology of lncRNA is multifaceted, demonstrating a complex array of molecular and cellular functions. These studies reveal that lncRNAs are involved in every stage of PCa. Their clinical utility for diagnosis, prognosis, and prediction of PCa is well supported, but further evaluation for their therapeutic candidacy is needed. We provide a detailed resource and view inside the lncRNA landscape for other cancer biologists, oncologists, and clinicians.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this study, we review current knowledge of the non-protein-coding genome in prostate cancer (PCa). We conclude that many of these regions are functional and a source of accurate biomarkers in PCa. With a strong research foundation, they hold promise as future therapeutic targets, yet clinical trials are necessary to determine their intrinsic value to PCa disease management.

Long noncoding RNAs biomarker-based cancer assessment

Cancer diagnosis have mainly relied on the incorporation of molecular biomarkers as part of routine diagnostic tool. The molecular alteration ranges from those involving DNA, RNA, noncoding RNAs (microRNAs and long noncoding RNAs [lncRNAs]) and proteins. lncRNAs are recently discovered noncoding endogenous RNAs that critically regulates the development, invasion, and metastasis of cancer cells. They are dysregulated in different types of malignancies and have the potential to serve as diagnostic markers for cancer. The expression of noncoding RNAs is altered following many diseases, and besides, some of them can be secreted from the cells into the circulation following the apoptotic and necrotic cell death. These secreted noncoding RNAs are known as cell free RNA. These RNAs can be secreted from the cell through the apoptotic body, extracellular vesicles including microvesicle and exosome, and bind to proteins. Since, lncRNAs display high organ and cell specificity, can be found in the blood, urine, tumor tissue, or other tissues or bodily fluids of some patients with cancer, this review summarizes the most significant and up-to-date findings of research on lncRNAs involvement in different cancers, focusing on the potential of cancer-related lncRNAs as biomarkers for diagnosis, prognosis, and therapy.

Combination of Prostate Cancer Antigen 3 and Prostate-Specific Antigen Improves Diagnostic Accuracy in Men at Risk of Prostate Cancer

Context.—

Prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) is a noncoding RNA that is highly overexpressed in prostate cancer (PCa) tissue and excreted in urine in patients with PCa.

Objective.—

To assess the clinical utility of urinary PCA3 in men at risk of PCa.

Design.—

We retrospectively reviewed a cohort of 271 men (median age, 63 years) with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and/or strong family history, and/or abnormal digital rectal examination findings. Diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+, LR−), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUC) were evaluated.

Results.—

PCA3 score was a significant predictor of prostate biopsy outcome (P &lt; .001). A PCA3 score of 30 was the optimal cutoff for our study cohort, with a diagnostic sensitivity of 72.7%, specificity of 67.5%, PPV of 47.1%, NPV of 86.2%, LR+ of 2.24, LR− of 0.40, and DOR of 5.55. At this cutoff score, the PCA3 assay could avoid 57.4% of unnecessary invasive biopsies in the overall study cohort and 70.3% in the subgroup with PSA level in the “gray zone” (4–10 ng/mL). A logistic regression algorithm combining PCA3 with PSA increased the AUC from 0.571 for PSA-only to 0.729 (P &lt; .001). The logistic combined marker gained the ability to discriminate low-grade from high-grade cancers.

Conclusions.—

Our data suggest that PCA3 improves the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of PSA and that the combination of PCA3 with PSA gives better overall performance in identification of PCa than serum PSA alone in the high-risk population.

Long Non-Coding RNA as Potential Biomarker for Prostate Cancer: Is It Making a Difference?

Whole genome transcriptomic analyses have identified numerous long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) transcripts that are increasingly implicated in cancer biology. LncRNAs are found to promote essential cancer cell functions such as proliferation, invasion, and metastasis, with the potential to serve as novel biomarkers of various cancers and to further reveal uncharacterized aspects of tumor biology. However, the biological and molecular mechanisms as well as the clinical applications of lncRNAs in diverse diseases are not completely understood, and remain to be fully explored. LncRNAs may be critical players and regulators in prostate cancer carcinogenesis and progression, and could serve as potential biomarkers for prostate cancer. This review focuses on lncRNA biomarkers that are already available for clinical use and provides an overview of lncRNA biomarkers that are under investigation for clinical development in prostate cancer.

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.

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.

Prostate-specific antigen and other serum and urine markers in prostate cancer

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is one of the most widely used tumor markers, and strongly correlates with the risk of harboring from prostate cancer (PCa). This risk is visible already several years in advance but PSA has severe limitations for PCa detection with its low specificity and low negative predictive value. There is an urgent need for new biomarkers especially to detect clinically significant and aggressive PCa. From all PSA-based markers, the FDA-approved Prostate Health Index (phi) shows improved specificity over percent free and total PSA. Other serum kallikreins or sarcosine in serum or urine show more diverging data. In urine, the FDA-approved prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) has also proven its utility in the detection and management of early PCa. However, some aspects on its correlation with aggressiveness and the low sensitivity at very high values have to be re-examined. The detection of a fusion of the androgen regulated TMPRSS2 gene with the ERG oncogene (from the ETS family), which acts as transcription factor gene, in tissue of ~50% of all PCa patients was one milestone in PCa research. When combining the urinary assays for TMPRSS2:ERG and PCA3, an improved accuracy for PCa detection is visible. PCA3 and phi as the best available PCa biomarkers show an equal performance in direct comparisons.

Toward the detection of prostate cancer in urine: a critical analysis

PURPOSE

Prostate specific antigen and digital rectal examination have low specificity for detecting prostate cancer and they poorly predict the presence of aggressive disease. Urine is readily available and noninvasive, and it represents a promising source of biomarkers for the early detection and prediction of prostate cancer prognosis. We identified promising biomarkers for urine based prostate cancer, examined trends and outlined potential pitfalls.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed PubMed® and Web of Science® database searches of the peer reviewed literature on urine based testing for prostate cancer. Original studies of this subject as well as a small number of reviews were analyzed, including the strengths and weaknesses. We provide a comprehensive review of urine based testing for prostate cancer that covers the technical aspects, including the methodology of urine collection, as well as recent developments in biomarkers spanning the fields of genomics, epigenetics, transcriptomics, proteomics and metabolomics.

RESULTS

The process of urine collection is subject to variability, which may result in conflicting clinical results. Detecting prostate cancer in urine is technically feasible, as demonstrated by numerous proof of principle studies, but few markers have been validated in multiple large sample sets. Biomarker development using urine has been accelerating in recent years with numerous studies identifying DNA, RNA, protein and metabolite based biomarkers in urine. Advanced clinical studies have identified PCA3 and TMPRSS2:ERG fusion transcripts as promising RNA markers for cancer detection and possibly prognosis. DNA methylation analysis of multiple genes improves specificity and represents a promising platform for developing clinical grade assays.

CONCLUSIONS

Urine based testing is noninvasive and represents a rich source of novel biomarkers for prostate cancer. Although urine shows promise for detecting cancer, the ability to identify aggressive subsets of prostate cancer needs further development.