The Kallikrein Panel for prostate cancer screening: its economic impact

How to Integrate Prostate Cancer Biomarkers in Urology Clinical Practice: An Update

Nowadays, the management of prostate cancer has become more and more challenging due to the increasing number of available treatment options, therapeutic agents, and our understanding of its carcinogenesis and disease progression. Moreover, currently available risk stratification systems used to facilitate clinical decision-making have limitations, particularly in providing a personalized and patient-centered management strategy. Although prognosis and prostate cancer-specific survival have improved in recent years, the heterogenous behavior of the disease among patients included in the same risk prognostic group negatively impacts not only our clinical decision-making but also oncological outcomes, irrespective of the treatment strategy. Several biomarkers, along with available tests, have been developed to help clinicians in difficult decision-making scenarios and guide management strategies. In this review article, we focus on the scientific evidence that supports the clinical use of several biomarkers considered by professional urological societies (and included in uro-oncological guidelines) in the diagnosis process and specific difficult management strategies for clinically localized or advanced prostate cancer.

Recent advances and future perspectives in the therapeutics of prostate cancer

Prostate cancer (PC) is one of the most common cancers in males and the fifth leading reason of death. Age, ethnicity, family history, and genetic defects are major factors that determine the aggressiveness and lethality of PC. The African population is at the highest risk of developing high-grade PC. It can be challenging to distinguish between low-risk and high-risk patients due to the slow progression of PC. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is a revolutionary discovery for the identification of PC. However, it has led to an increase in over diagnosis and over treatment of PC in the past few decades. Even if modifications are made to the standard PSA testing, the specificity has not been found to be significant. Our understanding of PC genetics and proteomics has improved due to advances in different fields. New serum, urine, and tissue biomarkers, such as PC antigen 3 (PCA3), have led to various new diagnostic tests, such as the prostate health index, 4K score, and PCA3. These tests significantly reduce the number of unnecessary and repeat biopsies performed. Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and prostatectomy are standard treatment options. However, newer novel hormone therapy drugs with a better response have been identified. Androgen deprivation and hormonal therapy are evolving as new and better options for managing hormone-sensitive and castration-resistant PC. This review aimed to highlight and discuss epidemiology, various risk factors, and developments in PC diagnosis and treatment regimens.

An overview of prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis: Potential role of miRNAs

Prostate cancer is the second most frequently diagnosed cancer among men worldwide, with the estimated sixth leading cause of cancer death. Despite major advancements in clinical biology and imaging, digital rectal examination (DRE), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and biopsies indication remain the keystone for screening. Several kits are used to detect genomic changes and non-coding RNAs in the sample. However, its indication remains controversial for screening purposes. There is an urged need for non-invasive biomarkers to implement precision medicine. Recent research shows that miRNAs have an important role in the diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic agents as non-invasive biomarkers. Though prostate cancer data remains controversial in other cancer types, such as breast cancer, miR-21 expression is upregulated. Here, we reported a prolonged revision of miRNAs as prostate cancer prognostic, diagnostic, and predictive tools, including data on androgen receptor (AR) signaling, epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) process, and cancer stem cells (CSCs) regulation. The combined utilization of miRNAs with other tests will help patients and clinicians to select the most appropriate personalized treatment and to avoid overdiagnosis and unnecessary biopsies. Future clinical applications of our reported novel miRNAs have a substantial role in the primary diagnosis of prostate cancer to help treatment decisions.

A SelectMDx/magnetic resonance imaging-based nomogram to diagnose prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

70%-80% of prostate cancer (PCa) biopsies performed in the US annually may be unnecessary. Specific antigen testing (PSA) and tans rectal ultrasound (TRUS) are imprecise predictive methods for risk of PCa. Novel strategies are critical to guide biopsy decision-making.

AIM

We assessed the utility and accuracy of combining Select MDx and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) scores for predicting risk of PCa.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Our study was conducted at Mount Sinai hospital at Urology department in New York City from January 2020 to April 2021. Total 129 men performed select MDx test. Indications for prostate biopsy were high-risk Select MDx score, suspicious DRE, PI-RADS scores 3/4/5 on mpMRI, or any combination of these. Fifty-one percentage of 129 patients underwent systemic or combined systemic and MRI/US (ultrasound) fusion biopsy; All men underwent 3 T MRI of Prostate w/wo contrast using standard protocols prior to biopsy. A single surgeon performed prostate biopsies. Gleason score ≥3 + 3 on biopsy is defined as outcome. Descriptive statistics were calculated as cross tables. Binary logistic regression model is used to determine the outcome. The nomogram was based on the coefficients of the logit function. ROCs were plotted and decision curve analysis was performed. Using both high-risk Select MDx and PI-RADS scores of 4/5, 87% of biopsies could have been avoided, while detecting 64% of PCa and missing 36%. If biopsies were performed on men with positive Select MDx or PI-RADS 4/5 results, 16% of biopsies could have been avoided while detecting all PCa. Combining these scores improved specificity and accuracy for the detection of PCa over either used alone. Study limitations include limited sample size, sole institution study, and risk or overfitting for the proposed model which may limit generalizability.

CONCLUSION

Combining SelectMDx and mpMRI PI-PADS scores of 4/5 may be useful for PCa biopsy decision-making.

Tissue- and Liquid-Based Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer Precision Medicine

Worldwide, prostate cancer (PC) is the second-most-frequently diagnosed male cancer and the fifth-most-common cause of all cancer-related deaths. Suspicion of PC in a patient is largely based upon clinical signs and the use of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. Although PSA levels have been criticised for a lack of specificity, leading to PC over-diagnosis, it is still the most commonly used biomarker in PC management. Unfortunately, PC is extremely heterogeneous, and it can be difficult to stratify patients whose tumours are unlikely to progress from those that are aggressive and require treatment intensification. Although PC-specific biomarker research has previously focused on disease diagnosis, there is an unmet clinical need for novel prognostic, predictive and treatment response biomarkers that can be used to provide a precision medicine approach to PC management. In particular, the identification of biomarkers at the time of screening/diagnosis that can provide an indication of disease aggressiveness is perhaps the greatest current unmet clinical need in PC management. Largely through advances in genomic and proteomic techniques, exciting pre-clinical and clinical research is continuing to identify potential tissue, blood and urine-based PC-specific biomarkers that may in the future supplement or replace current standard practices. In this review, we describe how PC-specific biomarker research is progressing, including the evolution of PSA-based tests and those novel assays that have gained clinical approval. We also describe alternative diagnostic biomarkers to PSA, in addition to biomarkers that can predict PC aggressiveness and biomarkers that can predict response to certain therapies. We believe that novel biomarker research has the potential to make significant improvements to the clinical management of this disease in the near future.

Diagnostic Strategies for Treatment Selection in Advanced Prostate Cancer

Prostate Cancer (PCa) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among men worldwide. For most men with PCa, their disease will follow an indolent course. However, advanced PCa is associated with poor outcomes. There has been an advent of new therapeutic options with proven efficacy for advanced PCa in the last decade which has improved survival outcomes for men with this disease. Despite this, advanced PCa continues to be associated with a high rate of death. There is a lack of strong evidence guiding the timing and sequence of these novel treatment strategies. This paper focuses on a review of the strategies for diagnostic and the current evidence available for treatment selection in advanced PCa.

Markers of Toxicity and Response to Radiation Therapy in Patients With Prostate Cancer

The main treatment modalities for localized prostate cancer are surgery and radiation. Surgery removes the whole prostate gland, whereas with radiation therapy the irradiated prostate remains within the patient's body. Biomarkers specific to the prostate gland should become undetectable after surgery, but this is not the case when radiation therapy is used, as residual prostate cells may still be metabolically active. Here, we review the role of tumor markers of toxicity and response to radiation therapy in patients with prostate cancer, including prostate specific antigen, human kallikrein 2, osteopontin, prostate cancer associated 3, citrulline, and others.

[TMPRSS2-Erg/AR-V7: Prognostic value of tests in urine and biopsy rince material in prostate cancer]

INTRODUCTION

Nowadays, diagnostic biomarker research is oriented on a genomic characterisation of prostate cancer (PCa). This study evaluated diagnostic values of TMPRSS2-Erg fusion transcripts expression (TE) and androgen receptor variant 7 (AR-V7) on urine (tU) and biopsic rince material (tLRB) samples.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

TE and AR-V7 have been tested by RT-PCR and RT-qPCR on urine and biopsies' rince liquid on 372 patients referred for prostate biopsies.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty-three patients (62%) were diagnosed with PCa. tU.AR-V7 was positive for 15 healthy patients (28%) and 30 patients diagnosed with PCa (37%). tLRB.AR-V7 was positive for 66 patients (42%) diagnosed with PCa. Concerning TE for patients diagnosed with PCa, tU was positive for 59 patients (54%) and tLRB for 132 (55%). TE and TE/AR-V7 combination were significantly associated with PCa (P<0.001), as tLRB.AR-V7 (P<0.001). Sensitivity and specificity for TE/AR-V7 combination for PCa were respectively: tU.TE/AR-V7 67% and 70%, tLRB.TE/AR-V7 68.8% and 71%, and, tUtLRB.TE/AR-V7 83% and 60%. There was no benefit for AR-V7 and TE association versus TE alone when comparing AUC.

CONCLUSION

AR-V7 is not specific of PCa because of detection on healthy patients. This study did not managed to show a sufficient diagnostic value for TE/AR-V7 combination on urine and biospic rince material tests.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Performance of the 4Kscore Test in Plasma and Serum and Stability of the Component Analytes in Clinical Samples

BACKGROUND

The 4Kscore Test determines a personalized risk score for aggressive prostate cancer by combining the blood sample measurements of total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA), free PSA (fPSA), intact PSA (iPSA), and human kallikrein-related peptidase 2 (hK2) with patient clinical information to generate the patient risk's score; thus, accuracy and precision of the 4Kscore depend on the reliability of these measurements. Although tPSA and fPSA are measured on a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved platform, the performance of the iPSA and hK2 assays in the clinical setting has not previously been reported.

METHODS

Analytical performance was determined for the iPSA and hK2 assays in both serum and EDTA plasma, according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. Equivalence of the 4Kscore in both sample matrices was demonstrated in a 353-patient clinical cohort, and the stability of endogenous iPSA and hK2 for at least 3 days was demonstrated in a smaller subset.

RESULTS

Intralaboratory and interlaboratory precision of the iPSA and hK2 assays in both matrices was comparable with that of FDA-approved tPSA and fPSA assays (<18% for iPSA; <8% for hK2). The picogram per milliliter sensitivity and wide dynamic range of the iPSA and hK2 assays allowed for accurate measurements in the target population. The 4Kscore generated in either matrix up to 3 days after collection is equivalent to that measured within 24 h of collection (Passing-Bablok slope 95% CI: plasma, 0.999-1.034; serum, 0.997-1.040).

CONCLUSIONS

The robust performance of component assays and reliable stability of the endogenous analytes in clinical samples proven here ensures an accurate 4Kscore Test result.

Novel Diagnostic Biomarkers of Prostate Cancer: An Update

OBJECTIVE

In recent years, several biomarkers alternative to standard prostate specific antigen (PSA) for prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis have become available. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the current knowledge about alternative serum and urinary biomarkers for the diagnosis of PCa.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A research was conducted in Medline, restricted to English language articles published between December 2014 and June 2018 with the aim to update previously published series on PCa biomarkers. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) criteria were used for selecting studies with the lowest risk of bias.

RESULTS

Emerging role and actual controversies on serum and urine alternative biomarkers to standard PSA for PCa diagnosis, staging and prognosis assessment, such as prostate health index (PHI), PCA3, ConfirmMDx, Aberrant PSA glycosylation, MiPS, miRNAs are critically presented in the current review.

CONCLUSION

Although the use of several biomarkers has been recommended or questioned by different international guidelines, larger prospective randomized studies are still necessary to validate their efficacy in PCa detection, discrimination, prognosis and treatment effectiveness. To date, only PHI and 4Kscore have shown clinical relevance for discriminating more aggressive PCa. Furthermore, a new grading classification based on molecular features relevant for PCa risk-stratification and tailoring treatment is still needed.

A Rich Array of Prostate Cancer Molecular Biomarkers: Opportunities and Challenges

Prostate cancer is the most prevalent non-skin cancer in men and is the leading cause of cancer-related death. Early detection of prostate cancer is largely determined by a widely used prostate specific antigen (PSA) blood test and biopsy is performed for definitive diagnosis. Prostate cancer is asymptomatic in the early stage of the disease, comprises of diverse clinico-pathologic and progression features, and is characterized by a large subset of the indolent cancer type. Therefore, it is critical to develop an individualized approach for early detection, disease stratification (indolent vs. aggressive), and prediction of treatment response for prostate cancer. There has been remarkable progress in prostate cancer biomarker discovery, largely through advancements in genomic technologies. A rich array of prostate cancer diagnostic and prognostic tests has emerged for serum (4K, phi), urine (Progensa, T2-ERG, ExoDx, SelectMDx), and tumor tissue (ConfirmMDx, Prolaris, Oncoytype DX, Decipher). The development of these assays has created new opportunities for improving prostate cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment decisions. While opening exciting opportunities, these developments also pose unique challenges in terms of selecting and incorporating these assays into the continuum of prostate cancer patient care.

A multiparametric approach to improve upon existing prostate cancer screening and biopsy recommendations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of how genetic, serum, and urine biomarkers can help identify men at high risk for prostate cancer (PCa) and aggressive disease and men who would benefit from prostate biopsy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Screening for PCa is controversial because of concerns about overdiagnosis and overtreatment of nonlife-threatening tumors. Therefore, an approach to screening that includes a detailed family history with genetic testing of risk single nucleotide polymorphisms and high-penetrance genetic variants should be considered. After an elevated serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level has been confirmed, obtaining additional information (family history, biomarkers, and imaging) should be considered before recommending a prostate biopsy.

SUMMARY

There are now genetic tests that can help identify men who would benefit from PSA testing. Additional biomarker and imaging tests should be offered to those men who are confirmed to have elevated PSA values. These new biomarkers and imaging tests can improve the specificity of PSA testing while missing a small percentage of high-grade tumors. The path forward involves a multiparametric risk assessment based on clinical data and these new tests.

The role of IGF-1 and the distribution of body fat in decreasing the number of prostate rebiopsies

OBJECTIVE

To assess the usefulness of IGF-1 and internal organ fat measured by bioelectrical impedance audiometry to avoid rebiopsies in patients with persistently high prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A prospective study was conducted with 92 patients who underwent prostate rebiopsy due to high PSA levels with negative results in the rectal examination and a lack of preneoplastic lesions. The patients previously had their IGF-1 levels measured and had undergone an impedance audiometry test using the abdominal Fat Analyser AB-140 TANITA system. We calculated the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for the PSA levels, %PSA, internal organ fat and IGF-1 and PSA density.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were diagnosed with prostate cancer. These patients had significantly higher PSA, PSAd and IGF-1 values and a tendency towards higher internal organ fat levels and lower %PSA readings (p=.001, p=.003, p=.001, p=.24 and P=0.28, respectively). The ROC curve showed an area under the curve for IGF-1 and PSA of .82 and .81, respectively. Using the cutoff points for 95% sensitivity and using the 3 criteria as an indication of rebiopsy, 74% of the biopsies would have been spared, leaving undiagnosed only 1 patient with clinically significant cancer -Gleason score>7 (4+3)-. The positive and negative predictive values for the set of variables were higher than for each one separately (PPV: 66/NPV: 63). The cost of both determinations was 82 euros.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that measuring IGF-1 could significantly decrease the number of unnecessary rebiopsies in an inexpensive and safe manner.

Clinical performance of the 4Kscore Test to predict high-grade prostate cancer at biopsy: A meta-analysis of us and European clinical validation study results

The 4Kscore® Test (OPKO Diagnostics, Woburn, MA) is a blood test utilized prior to a prostate biopsy to determine a patient's risk of high-grade prostate cancer (PCa) should the biopsy be performed, thus providing critical information in the clinical management of men with a suspicious prostate-specific antigen value or digital rectal examination result. Multiple US and European clinical studies confirmed that a prebiopsy 4Kscore Test has a high degree of discrimination for a subsequent discovery of high-grade (Gleason score ≥7) PCa. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive accuracy of the 4Kscore Test to discriminate between patients with and without high-grade PCa based on published clinical validation studies. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the eligible 4Kscore Test clinical validation studies was conducted. The pooled area under the curve (AUC) of the 4Kscore Test as reported from all the studies, and the heterogeneity among these studies were analyzed and repeated for subgroups of the studies. Twelve clinical validation studies were included in the meta-analysis, comprising a total of 11,134 patients. The pooled AUC to discriminate for high-grade PCa for all 12 studies was 0.81 (fixed effects 95% CI, 0.80-0.83). Restricting the analysis to the six publications that used the contemporary 4Kscore Test algorithm led to very similar results (AUC 0.81; 95% CI, 0.79-0.83). Heterogeneity was high among all of the 12 studies, as well as among the six publications that used the contemporary 4Kscore Test (Cochrane's Q test, p = 0.001 for both); however, in both cases, after exclusion of a single outlying study with a much lower AUC, heterogeneity was no longer significant (p = 0.08 and p = 0.21). The pooled estimate of 4Kscore Test discrimination (AUC) for high-grade PCa is >0.80, and is consistent across multiple US and European clinical validation studies.

Use of the 4Kscore test to predict the risk of aggressive prostate cancer prior to prostate biopsy: Overall cost savings and improved quality of care to the us healthcare system

The 4Kscore® Test (BioReference Laboratories, Elmwood Park, NJ) is a blood test that accurately determines the risk of aggressive prostate cancer and significantly reduces prostate biopsies and associated overdiagnosis and overtreatment of indolent cancer. A budget impact model was developed to test the hypothesis that the 4Kscore Test can improve quality of care and deliver cost savings for patients who are suspected of having prostate cancer and would otherwise undergo prostate biopsy under the current standard of care (SOC) in the United States. The direct costs (diagnosis plus treatment) utilized in the model are based on Medicare payment data and were calculated over a 1-year time horizon. The model compares SOC, in which all patients have prostate biopsy, to a "4Kscore strategy," in which the 4Kscore Test is used to guide the decision to biopsy the prostate. A set of one-way sensitivity analyses was conducted to examine the robustness of the findings. Savings of more than $169 million (15.6% of total SOC costs) were realized in the 4Kscore strategy versus SOC ($917 M versus $1,086 M, respectively) in a cohort of 100,000 patients. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the findings are robust. Most cost savings for the 4Kscore strategy were realized in patients who, when managed by SOC, are found to have no prostate cancer or Gleason score 6 pathology. The patients with Gleason score 6 exhibited the greatest benefits from the 4Kscore strategy, avoiding both an unnecessary prostate biopsy and subsequent overtreatment. The 4Kscore Test was shown to significantly reduce costs to the healthcare system while improving patients' quality of care. Providers and their patients suspected of having prostate cancer should consider using the 4Kscore Test prior to proceeding with prostate biopsy.

Recent progress and perspectives on prostate cancer biomarkers

The application of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in prostate cancer (PC) screening, diagnosis, and prognosis has improved the clinical management of PC patients. However, the PSA assay has been faced with criticism due to its potential association with over-diagnosis and subsequent overtreatment of patients with indolent disease. The United States Preventive Services Task Force incited much debate over PSA-based screening in 2012 by recommending against this approach. However, the PSA assay remains the first-line tool for the early detection of PC. This debate highlights the unmet need for non-invasive PC biomarkers with greater sensitivity and specificity that are capable of distinguishing aggressive disease from indolent disease, predicting treatment response, and guiding treatment decisions. Recent investigations into putative PC biomarkers have focused on PSA isoform assays (prostate health index, 4-kallikurein panel), PC-associated genes in the urine (PCA3 and TMPRSS2-ERG), glycan-associated biomarkers (S2, 3PSA, GCNT1, and tri- and tetra-antennary serum N-glycans), and circulating tumor cells. Although substantial efforts to identify novel PC biomarkers that might replace PSA have been put forth, the majority of the putative PC biomarkers reported in the last few years are still under investigation or validation. This review provides an overview of the current state of PC biomarker research and focuses on a few promising PC biomarkers in development.

The Present and Future of Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer: Proteomics, Genomics, and Immunology Advancements

Prostate cancer (PC) is the second most common form of cancer in men worldwide. Biomarkers have emerged as essential tools for treatment and assessment since the variability of disease behavior, the cost and diversity of treatments, and the related impairment of quality of life have given rise to a need for a personalized approach. High-throughput technology platforms in proteomics and genomics have accelerated the development of biomarkers. Furthermore, recent successes of several new agents in PC, including immunotherapy, have stimulated the search for predictors of response and resistance and have improved the understanding of the biological mechanisms at work. This review provides an overview of currently established biomarkers in PC, as well as a selection of the most promising biomarkers within these particular fields of development.

Emerging biomarkers in the detection and prognosis of prostate cancer

The prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is currently the most used tumor marker in the early detection of the prostate cancer (PCa), despite its low specificity and low negative predictive value. New biomarkers, including urine prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) score, Prostate Health Index (PHI), and the four-kallikrein panel, have been investigated during recent years especially with the aim of detecting aggressive PCa. Results suggest the ability of these biomarkers to improve the specificity of PSA in the detection of PCa, although there are not enough results directly comparing these biomarkers to know their complementarity. The relationship with PCa aggressiveness seems to be confirmed for PHI and for the four-kallikrein panel, but not for PCA3 score. However, available results suggest that emerging biomarkers may be useful as part of a multivariable approach for the screening and prognosis of PCa. Nevertheless, larger prospective studies comparing these biomarkers are necessary to evaluate definitely their value in the management of early PCa.

PSA and beyond: alternative prostate cancer biomarkers

BACKGROUND

The use of biomarkers for prostate cancer screening, diagnosis and prognosis has the potential to improve the clinical management of the patients. Owing to inherent limitations of the biomarker prostate-specific antigen (PSA), intensive efforts are currently directed towards a search for alternative prostate cancer biomarkers, particularly those that can predict disease aggressiveness and drive better treatment decisions.

METHODS

A literature search of Medline articles focused on recent and emerging advances in prostate cancer biomarkers was performed. The most promising biomarkers that have the potential to meet the unmet clinical needs in prostate cancer patient management and/or that are clinically implemented were selected.

CONCLUSIONS

With the advent of advanced genomic and proteomic technologies, we have in recent years seen an enormous spurt in prostate cancer biomarker research with several promising alternative biomarkers being discovered that show an improved sensitivity and specificity over PSA. The new generation of biomarkers can be tested via serum, urine, or tissue-based assays that have either received regulatory approval by the US Food and Drug Administration or are available as Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-based laboratory developed tests. Additional emerging novel biomarkers for prostate cancer, including circulating tumor cells, microRNAs and exosomes, are still in their infancy. Together, these biomarkers provide actionable guidance for prostate cancer risk assessment, and are expected to lead to an era of personalized medicine.

Prostate cancer marker panel with single cell sensitivity in urine

BACKGROUND

Over one million men undergo prostate biopsies annually in the United States, a majority of whom due to elevated serum PSA. More than half of the biopsies turn out to be negative for prostate cancer (CaP). The limitations of both the PSA test and the biopsy procedure have led to the development for more precise CaP detection assays in urine (e.g., PCA3, TMPRSS2-ERG) or blood (e.g., PHI, 4K). Here, we describe the development and evaluation of the Urine CaP Marker Panel (UCMP) assay for sensitive and reproducible detection of CaP cells in post-digital rectal examination (post-DRE) urine.

METHODS

The cellular content of the post-DRE urine was captured on a translucent filter membrane, which is placed on Cytoclear slides for direct evaluation by microscopy and immuno-cytochemistry (ICC). Cells captured on the membrane were assayed for PSA and Prostein expression to identify prostate epithelial cells, and for ERG and AMACR to identify prostate tumor cells. Immunostained cells were analyzed for quantitative and qualitative features and correlated with biopsy positive and negative status for malignancy.

RESULTS

The assay was optimized for single cell capture sensitivity and downstream evaluations by spiking a known number of cells from established CaP cell lines, LNCaP and VCaP, into pre-cleared control urine. The cells captured from the post-DRE urine of subjects, obtained prior to biopsy procedure, were co-stained for ERG, AMACR (CaP specific), and Prostein or PSA (prostate epithelium specific) rendering a whole cell based analysis and characterization. A feasibility cohort of 63 post-DRE urine specimens was assessed. Comparison of the UCMP results with blinded biopsy results showed an assay sensitivity of 64% (16 of 25) and a specificity of 68.8% (22 of 32) for CaP detection by biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study assessing a minimally invasive CaP detection assay with single cell sensitivity cell-capture and characterization from the post-DRE urine holds promise for further development of this novel assay platform. Prostate 75: 969-975, 2015. © 2015 The Authors. The Prostate, published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Kallikrein-related peptidases targeted therapies in prostate cancer: perspectives and challenges

INTRODUCTION

Despite the emergence of several new effective treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients, disease progression inevitably occurs, leading scientific community to carefully look for novel therapeutic targets of prostate cancer. Kallikrein (KLK)-related peptidases have been demonstrated to facilitate prostate tumorigenesis and disease progression through the development of an oncogenic microenvironment for prostate cells.

AREAS COVERED

This review first summarizes the large amount of preclinical data showing the involvement of KLKs in prostate cancer pathobiology. In the second part, the authors assess the current status and future directions for KLK-targeted therapy and briefly describe the advances and challenges implicated in the design of effective manufactured drugs. The authors then focus on the preclinical data and on Phase I/II studies of the most promising KLK-targeted agents in prostate cancer. The drugs discussed here are divided on the basis of their mechanism of action: KLK-engineered inhibitors; KLK-activated pro-drugs; KLK-targeted microRNAs and small interfering RNAs(-/)small hairpin RNAs; KLK vaccines and antibodies.

EXPERT OPINION

Targeting KLK expression and/or activity could be a promising direction in prostate cancer treatment. Future human clinical trials will help us to evaluate the real benefits, toxicities and the consequent optimal use of KLK-targeted drugs, as mono-therapy or in combination regimens.

Biomarkers in prostate cancer: what's new?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review is intended to provide an overview of the current state of biomarkers for prostate cancer (PCa), with a focus on biomarkers approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as well as biomarkers available from Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment (CLIA)-certified clinical laboratories within the last 1-2 years.

RECENT FINDINGS

During the past 2 years, two biomarkers have been approved by the US FDA. These include proPSA as part of the Prostate Health Index (phi) by Beckman Coulter, Inc and PCA3 as Progensa by Gen Probe, Inc. With the advances in genomic and proteomic technologies, several new CLIA-based laboratory-developed tests have become available. Examples are Oncotype DX from Genomics Health, Inc, and Prolaris from Myriad Genetics, Inc. In most cases, these new tests are based on a combination of multiple genomic or proteomic biomarkers.

SUMMARY

Several new tests, as discussed in this review, have become available during the last 2 years. Although the intended use of most of these tests is to distinguish PCa from benign prostatic conditions with better sensitivity and specificity than prostate-specific antigen, studies have shown that some of them may also be useful in the differentiation of aggressive from nonaggressive forms of PCa.

A multi-institutional prospective trial in the USA confirms that the 4Kscore accurately identifies men with high-grade prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

The 4Kscore combines measurement of four kallikreins in blood with clinical information as a measure of the probability of significant (Gleason ≥7) prostate cancer (PCa) before prostate biopsy.

OBJECTIVE

To perform the first prospective evaluation of the 4Kscore in predicting Gleason ≥7 PCa in the USA.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Prospective enrollment of 1012 men scheduled for prostate biopsy, regardless of prostate-specific antigen level or clinical findings, was conducted at 26 US urology centers between October 2013 and April 2014.

INTERVENTION

The 4Kscore.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was Gleason ≥7 PCa on prostate biopsy. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, risk calibration, and decision curve analysis (DCA) were determined, along with comparisons of probability cutoffs for reducing the number of biopsies and their impact on delaying diagnosis.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Gleason ≥7 PCa was found in 231 (23%) of the 1012 patients. The 4Kscore showed excellent calibration and demonstrated higher discrimination (AUC 0.82) and net benefit compared to a modified Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator 2.0 model and standard of care (biopsy for all men) according to DCA. A possible reduction of 30-58% in the number biopsies was identified with delayed diagnosis in only 1.3-4.7% of Gleason ≥7 PCa cases, depending on the threshold used for biopsy. Pathological assessment was performed according to the standard of care at each site without centralized review.

CONCLUSION

The 4Kscore showed excellent diagnostic performance in detecting significant PCa. It is a useful tool in selecting men who have significant disease and are most likely to benefit from a prostate biopsy from men with no cancer or indolent cancer.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The 4Kscore provides each patient with an accurate and personalized measure of the risk of Gleason ≥7 cancer to aid in decision-making regarding the need for prostate biopsy.

Predictions for the future of kallikrein-related peptidases in molecular diagnostics

Kallikrein-related peptidases (KLKs) form a cancer-related ensemble of serine proteases. This multigene family hosts the most widely used cancer biomarker that is PSA-KLK3, with millions of tests performed annually worldwide. The present report provides an overview of the biomarker potential of the extended KLK family (KLK1-KLK15) in various disease settings and envisages approaches that could lead to additional KLK-driven applications in future molecular diagnostics. Particular focus is given on the inclusion of KLKs into multifaceted cancer biomarker panels that provide enhanced diagnostic, prognostic and/or predictive accuracy in several human malignancies. Such panels have been described so far for prostate, ovarian, lung and colorectal cancers. The role of KLKs as biomarkers in non-malignant disease settings, such as Alzheimer's disease and multiple sclerosis, is also commented upon. Predictions are given on the challenges and future directions regarding clinically oriented KLK research.