1
|
Liu Y, Hatano K, Nonomura N. Liquid Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Current Status and Emerging Prospects. World J Mens Health 2024; 42:42.e45. [PMID: 38772530 DOI: 10.5534/wjmh.230386] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/31/2023] [Revised: 01/12/2024] [Accepted: 01/22/2024] [Indexed: 05/23/2024] Open
Abstract
Prostate cancer (PCa) is a major health concern that necessitates appropriate diagnostic approaches for timely intervention. This review critically evaluates the role of liquid biopsy techniques, focusing on blood- and urine-based biomarkers, in overcoming the limitations of conventional diagnostic methods. The 4Kscore test and Prostate Health Index have demonstrated efficacy in distinguishing PCa from benign conditions. Urinary biomarker tests such as PCa antigen 3, MyProstateScore, SelectMDx, and ExoDx Prostate IntelliScore test have revolutionized risk stratification and minimized unnecessary biopsies. Emerging biomarkers, including non-coding RNAs, circulating tumor DNA, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) glycosylation, offer valuable insights into PCa biology, enabling personalized treatment strategies. Advancements in non-invasive liquid biomarkers for PCa diagnosis may facilitate the stratification of patients and avoid unnecessary biopsies, particularly when PSA is in the gray area of 4 to 10 ng/mL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yutong Liu
- Department of Urology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
| | - Koji Hatano
- Department of Urology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan.
| | - Norio Nonomura
- Department of Urology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Rius Bilbao L, Valladares Gomez C, Aguirre Larracoechea U, Pereira Arias JG, Arredondo Calvo P, Urdaneta Salegui LF, Escobal Tamayo V, Sanz Jaka JP, Recio Ayesa A, Mar Medina J, Mar Medina C. Do PHI and PHI density improve detection of clinically significant prostate cancer only in the PSA gray zone? Clin Chim Acta 2023; 542:117270. [PMID: 36893880 DOI: 10.1016/j.cca.2023.117270] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2022] [Revised: 02/17/2023] [Accepted: 02/23/2023] [Indexed: 03/09/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Prostate health index (PHI) is a predictive biomarker of positive prostate biopsy. The majority of evidence refers to its use in the PSA gray zone (4-10 ng/mL) and negative digital rectal exam (DRE). We aim to evaluate and compare the predictive accuracy of PHI and PHI density (PHId) with PSA, percentage of free PSA and PSA density, in a wider range of patients for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). METHODS Multicenter prospective study that included patients suspicious of harboring prostate cancer. Non-probabilistic convenience sampling, where men who attended the urology consultation were tested for PHI before prostate biopsy. To evaluate and compare diagnostic accuracy AUC and decision curve analysis (DCA) were calculated. All these procedures were performed for the overall sample and the following subsamples: PSA < 4 ng/ml; PSA 4-10 ng/ml; PSA 4-10 ng/ml plus negative DRE and PSA > 10 ng/ml. RESULTS Among the 559 men included, 194 (34.7%) were diagnosed of csPCa. PHI and PHId outperfomed PSA in all subgroups. PHI best diagnostic performance was found in PSA 4-10 ng/ml with negative DRE (sensitivity 93.33, NPV 96.04). Regarding AUC, significant differences were found between PHId and PSA in the subgroup of PSA 4-10 ng/ml, whatever DRE status. In DCA, PHI density shows the highest net benefit. CONCLUSIONS PHI and PHId outperfom PSA in csPCa detection, not only in the PSA grey zone with negative DRE, but also in a wider range of PSA values. There is an urgent need of prospective studies to established a validated threshold and its incorporation in risk calculators.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leire Rius Bilbao
- Osakidetza Basque Health Service, Barrualde-Galdakao Integrated Health Organisation, Department of Urology, Spain; Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Spain.
| | - Carmen Valladares Gomez
- Osakidetza Basque Health Service, Barrualde-Galdakao Integrated Health Organisation, Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, Spain; Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Spain
| | - Urko Aguirre Larracoechea
- Osakidetza Basque Health Service, Barrualde-Galdakao Integrated Health Organisation, Research Unit, Spain
| | | | - Pablo Arredondo Calvo
- Osakidetza Basque Health Service, Barrualde-Galdakao Integrated Health Organisation, Department of Urology, Spain
| | | | - Victor Escobal Tamayo
- Osakidetza Basque Health Service, Barakaldo-Sestao Integrated Health Organisation, Department of Urology, Spain
| | - Juan Pablo Sanz Jaka
- Osakidetza Basque Health Service, Donostialdea Integrated Health Organisation, Department of Urology, Spain
| | - Adrian Recio Ayesa
- Osakidetza Basque Health Service, Donostialdea Integrated Health Organisation, Department of Urology, Spain
| | - Javier Mar Medina
- Osakidetza Basque Health Service, Debagoiena Integrated Health Organisation, Research Unit, Spain; Biodonostia Health Research Institute, Donostia-San Sebastián, Spain; Kronikgune Institute for Health Services Research, Barakaldo, Spain
| | - Carmen Mar Medina
- Osakidetza Basque Health Service, Barrualde-Galdakao Integrated Health Organisation, Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, Spain; Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Choi J, Kang M, Sung HH, Jeon HG, Jeong BC, Seo SI, Jeon SS, Lee HM. Correlation between Gleason score distribution and Prostate Health Index in patients with prostate-specific antigen values of 2.5-10 ng/mL. Investig Clin Urol 2021; 61:582-587. [PMID: 33135403 PMCID: PMC7606122 DOI: 10.4111/icu.20200084] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2020] [Revised: 06/18/2020] [Accepted: 06/23/2020] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To determine the clinical significance and correlation between the Prostate Health Index (PHI) and Gleason score in patients with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value of 2.5–10 ng/mL. Materials and Methods This retrospective analysis included 114 patients who underwent biopsy after completion of the PHI from November 2018 to July 2019. Various parameters such as PSA, PHI, PSA density, free PSA, p2PSA, and %free PSA were collected, and correlations with biopsy Gleason score and cancer detection rates were investigated. Results Baseline characteristics were comparable between PHI groups (0–26.9 [n=11], 27.0–35.9 [n=17], 36.0–54.9 [n=50], and ≥55.0 [n=36]). A total of 37 patients (32.5%) were diagnosed with prostate cancer, and 28 (24.6%) were diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPC, Gleason score ≥7) after prostate biopsy. The cancer detection rate gradually increased with a corresponding increase in the PHI (18%, 24%, 30%, and 44%, respectively). The same pattern was observed with detecting CSPC (0%, 18%, 26%, and 33%, respectively). There was no CSPC in the groups with PHI <27.0, and Gleason score 7 began to appear in groups with PHI ≥27.0. In particular, patients with Gleason score 8 and 9 were distributed only in the groups with PHI ≥36.0. Conclusions The diagnostic accuracy of detection of CSPC could be increased when prostate biopsy is performed in patients with a PHI ≥36.0. In this study, there was a clear Gleason score difference when the PHI cutoff value was set to 27.0 or 36.0.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joongwon Choi
- Department of Urology, VHS Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Minyong Kang
- Department of Urology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hyun Hwan Sung
- Department of Urology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hwang Gyun Jeon
- Department of Urology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Byong Chang Jeong
- Department of Urology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Seong Il Seo
- Department of Urology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Seong Soo Jeon
- Department of Urology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hyun Moo Lee
- Department of Urology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Degeling K, Pereira-Salgado A, Corcoran NM, Boutros PC, Kuhn P, IJzerman MJ. Health Economic Evidence for Liquid- and Tissue-based Molecular Tests that Inform Decisions on Prostate Biopsies and Treatment of Localised Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. EUR UROL SUPPL 2021; 27:77-87. [PMID: 34337517 PMCID: PMC8317795 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2021.03.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
CONTEXT Several liquid- and tissue-based biomarker tests (LTBTs) are available to inform the need for prostate biopsies and treatment of localised prostate cancer (PCa) through risk stratification, but translation into routine practice requires evidence of their clinical utility and economic impact. OBJECTIVE To review and summarise the health economic evidence on the ability of LTBTs to inform decisions on prostate biopsies and treatment of localised PCa through risk stratification. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A systematic search was performed in the EMBASE, MEDLINE, Health Technology Assessment, and National Health Service Health Economic Evaluation databases. Eligible publications were those presenting health economic evaluations of an LTBT to select individuals for biopsy or risk-stratify PCa patients for treatment. Data on the study objectives, context, methodology, clinical utility, and outcomes were extracted and summarised. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Of the 22 studies included, 14 were focused on test-informed biopsies and eight on treatment selection. Most studies performed cost-effectiveness analyses (n = 7), followed by costing (n = 4) or budget impact analyses (n = 3). Most (18 of 22) studies concluded that biomarker tests could decrease health care costs or would be cost-effective. However, downstream consequences and long-term outcomes were typically not included in studies that evaluated LTBT to inform biopsies. Long-term effectiveness was modelled by linking evidence from different sources instead of using data from prospective studies. CONCLUSIONS Although studies concluded that LTBTs would probably be cost-saving or -effective, the strength of this evidence is disputable because of concerns around the validity and transparency of the assumptions made. This warrants prospective interventional trials to inform health economic analyses to ensure collection of direct evidence of clinical outcomes based on LTBT use. PATIENT SUMMARY We reviewed studies that evaluated whether blood, urine, and tissue tests can reduce the health and economic burden of prostate cancer. Results indicate that these tests could be cost-effective, but clinical studies of long-term outcomes are needed to confirm the findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koen Degeling
- Cancer Health Services Research, Centre for Cancer Research, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
- Cancer Health Services Research, Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Amanda Pereira-Salgado
- Cancer Health Services Research, Centre for Cancer Research, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
- Cancer Health Services Research, Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Niall M. Corcoran
- Department of Urology, Frankston Hospital, Frankston, Australia
- Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
- Division of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Paul C. Boutros
- Eli and Edythe Broad Center of Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Institute for Precision Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Centre, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Departments of Human Genetics and Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Peter Kuhn
- USC Michelson Center for Convergent Biosciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Department of Biological Sciences, Dornsife College of Letters, Arts, and Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Maarten J. IJzerman
- Cancer Health Services Research, Centre for Cancer Research, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
- Cancer Health Services Research, Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
- Department of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
- Health Technology and Services Research, Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Huang D, Yang X, Wu Y, Lin X, Xu D, Na R, Xu J. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Prostate Health Index in Decision Making for Initial Prostate Biopsy. Front Oncol 2020; 10:565382. [PMID: 33330035 PMCID: PMC7732507 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.565382] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2020] [Accepted: 10/27/2020] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Clinical studies have suggested that prostate health index (phi) outperforms prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests in prostate cancer detection. The cost-effectiveness of phi with different cutoffs is poorly understood in the context of decision making for prostate biopsy. Methods In a multicenter cohort, 3,348 men with elevated total PSA (tPSA) underwent initial prostate biopsy from August 2013 to May 2019. We constructed a decision model to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of different phi cutoffs. Total costs and reimbursement payments were based on the fee schedule of Shanghai Basic Medical Insurance and converted into United States dollars ($). Two willingness-to-pay thresholds were estimated as one or three times the average gross domestic product per capita of China ($7,760 or $23,279, respectively). Results The total costs of prostate biopsy and PSA tests were estimated at $315 and $19, respectively. The cost of phi test varied between $72 to $130 in different medical centers. Under different phi cutoffs (from 23 to 35), phi test predicted reductions of 420 (21.7%) to 972 (50.2%) in unnecessary biopsies, with a total gain of 23.77-57.58 quality adjusted life-years compared to PSA tests. All the cutoffs would be cost-effective for patients with tPSA levels of 2-10 ng/ml. Applying 27 as the cutoff was cost-effective for each tPSA range, with missing positive cases ranging from 11 (3.4%) to 33 (11.5%). Conclusions Using phi test was cost-effective in the decision-making process for initial prostate biopsy, especially for patients with tPSA values between 2-10 ng/ml. The phi cutoff of 27 was cost-effective regardless of tPSA ranges and should be recommended from a health-economic perspective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Da Huang
- Department of Urology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Xiaoqun Yang
- Department of Pathology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Yishuo Wu
- Department of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Xiaoling Lin
- Department of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Danfeng Xu
- Department of Urology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Rong Na
- Department of Urology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Jianfeng Xu
- Program for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, IL, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Filella X, Albaladejo MD, Allué JA, Castaño MA, Morell-Garcia D, Ruiz MÀ, Santamaría M, Torrejón MJ, Giménez N. Prostate cancer screening: guidelines review and laboratory issues. Clin Chem Lab Med 2020; 57:1474-1487. [PMID: 31120856 DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2018-1252] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2018] [Accepted: 04/21/2019] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
Background Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) remains as the most used biomarker in the detection of early prostate cancer (PCa). Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are produced to facilitate incorporation of evidence into clinical practice. This is particularly useful when PCa screening remains controversial and guidelines diverge among different medical institutions, although opportunistic screening is not recommended. Methods We performed a systematic review of guidelines about PCa screening using PSA. Guidelines published since 2008 were included in this study. The most updated version of these CPGs was used for the evaluation. Results Twenty-two guidelines were selected for review. In 59% of these guidelines, recommendations were graded according to level of evidence (n = 13), but only 18% of the guidelines provided clear algorithms (n = 4). Each CPG was assessed using a checklist of laboratory issues, including pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical factors. We found that laboratory medicine specialists participate in 9% of the guidelines reviewed (n = 2) and laboratory issues were frequently omitted. We remarked that information concerning the consequences of World Health Organization (WHO) standard in PSA testing was considered by only two of 22 CPGs evaluated in this study. Conclusions We concluded that the quality of PCa early detection guidelines could be improved properly considering the laboratory issues in their development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xavier Filella
- Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Commission and Biological Markers of Cancer Commission, Spanish Society of Laboratory Medicine (SEQC-ML), Barcelona, Spain.,Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics (CDB), Hospital Clinic, IDIBAPS, Barcelona, Spain
| | - María Dolores Albaladejo
- Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Commission, Spanish Society of Laboratory Medicine (SEQC-ML), Barcelona, Spain.,Department of Clinical Analysis and Biochemistry, Hospital General Universitario Santa Lucía, Cartagena, Spain
| | - Juan Antonio Allué
- Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Commission, Spanish Society of Laboratory Medicine (SEQC-ML), Barcelona, Spain.,Synlab Diagnosticos Globales, Sevilla, Spain
| | - Miguel Angel Castaño
- Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Commission, Spanish Society of Laboratory Medicine (SEQC-ML), Barcelona, Spain.,Department of Biochemistry, Hospital Clínico Universitario Juan Ramón Jiménez, Huelva, Spain
| | - Daniel Morell-Garcia
- Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Commission, Spanish Society of Laboratory Medicine (SEQC-ML), Barcelona, Spain.,Department of Laboratory Medicine, Hospital Universitari Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain
| | - Maria Àngels Ruiz
- Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Commission, Spanish Society of Laboratory Medicine (SEQC-ML), Barcelona, Spain.,Department of Laboratory Medicine, Fundació Hospital de l'Esperit Sant, Santa Coloma de Gramenet, Barcelona, Spain
| | - María Santamaría
- Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Commission, Spanish Society of Laboratory Medicine (SEQC-ML), Barcelona, Spain.,Department of Biochemistry, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, Zaragoza, Spain
| | - María José Torrejón
- Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Commission, Spanish Society of Laboratory Medicine (SEQC-ML), Barcelona, Spain.,UGC of Clinical Analysis, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain
| | - Nuria Giménez
- Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Commission, Spanish Society of Laboratory Medicine (SEQC-ML), Barcelona, Spain.,Committee of Evidence-Based Laboratory Medicine (C-EBLM), International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC), Milano, Italy.,Research Unit, Research Foundation Mútua Terrassa, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.,Laboratory of Toxicology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Remmers S, Roobol MJ. Personalized strategies in population screening for prostate cancer. Int J Cancer 2020; 147:2977-2987. [PMID: 32394421 PMCID: PMC7586980 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.33045] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2020] [Revised: 04/06/2020] [Accepted: 04/07/2020] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
This review discusses evidence for population-based screening with contemporary screening tools. In Europe, prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening led to a relative reduction of prostate cancer (PCa) mortality, but also to a substantial amount of overdiagnosis and unnecessarily biopsies. Risk stratification based on a single variable (a clinical variable or based on the presence of a lesion on prostate imaging) or based on multivariable approaches can aid in reducing unnecessary prostate biopsies and overdiagnosis by selecting men who can benefit from further clinical assessment. Multivariable approaches include clinical variables, and biomarkers, often combined in risk calculators or nomograms. These risk calculators can also incorporate the result of MRI imaging. In general, as compared to a purely PSA based approach, the combination of relevant prebiopsy information results in superior selection of men at higher risk of harboring clinically significant prostate cancer. Currently, it is not possible to draw any conclusions on the superiority of these multivariable risk-based approaches since head-to-head comparisons are virtually lacking. Recently initiated large population-based screening studies in Finland, Germany and Sweden, incorporating various multivariable risk stratification approaches will hopefully give more insight in whether the harm-benefit ratio can be improved, that is, maintain (or improving) the ability to reduce metastatic disease and prostate cancer mortality while reducing harm caused by unnecessary testing and overdiagnosis including related overtreatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastiaan Remmers
- Department of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Monique J Roobol
- Department of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Kim L, Boxall N, George A, Burling K, Acher P, Aning J, McCracken S, Page T, Gnanapragasam VJ. Clinical utility and cost modelling of the phi test to triage referrals into image-based diagnostic services for suspected prostate cancer: the PRIM (Phi to RefIne Mri) study. BMC Med 2020; 18:95. [PMID: 32299423 PMCID: PMC7164355 DOI: 10.1186/s12916-020-01548-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2019] [Accepted: 03/03/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The clinical pathway to detect and diagnose prostate cancer has been revolutionised by the use of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI pre-biopsy). mpMRI however remains a resource-intensive test and is highly operator dependent with variable effectiveness with regard to its negative predictive value. Here we tested the use of the phi assay in standard clinical practice to pre-select men at the highest risk of harbouring significant cancer and hence refine the use of mpMRI and biopsies. METHODS A prospective five-centre study recruited men being investigated through an mpMRI-based prostate cancer diagnostic pathway. Test statistics for PSA, PSA density (PSAd) and phi were assessed for detecting significant cancers using 2 definitions: ≥ Grade Group (GG2) and ≥ Cambridge Prognostic Groups (CPG) 3. Cost modelling and decision curve analysis (DCA) was simultaneously performed. RESULTS A total of 545 men were recruited and studied with a median age, PSA and phi of 66 years, 8.0 ng/ml and 44 respectively. Overall, ≥ GG2 and ≥ CPG3 cancer detection rates were 64% (349/545), 47% (256/545) and 32% (174/545) respectively. There was no difference across centres for patient demographics or cancer detection rates. The overall area under the curve (AUC) for predicting ≥ GG2 cancers was 0.70 for PSA and 0.82 for phi. AUCs for ≥ CPG3 cancers were 0.81 and 0.87 for PSA and phi respectively. AUC values for phi did not differ between centres suggesting reliability of the test in different diagnostic settings. Pre-referral phi cut-offs between 20 and 30 had NPVs of 0.85-0.90 for ≥ GG2 cancers and 0.94-1.0 for ≥ CPG3 cancers. A strategy of mpMRI in all and biopsy only positive lesions reduced unnecessary biopsies by 35% but missed 9% of ≥ GG2 and 5% of ≥ CPG3 cancers. Using PH ≥ 30 to rule out referrals missed 8% and 5% of ≥ GG2 and ≥ CPG3 cancers (and reduced unnecessary biopsies by 40%). This was achieved however with 25% fewer mpMRI. Pathways incorporating PSAd missed fewer cancers but necessitated more unnecessary biopsies. The phi strategy had the lowest mean costs with DCA demonstrating net clinical benefit over a range of thresholds. CONCLUSION phi as a triaging test may be an effective way to reduce mpMRI and biopsies without compromising detection of significant prostate cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lois Kim
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Nicholas Boxall
- Department of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Anne George
- Urological Malignancies Programme CRUK & Cambridge Urology Translational Research and Clinical Trials Office, University of Cambridge Box 193, Cambridge Biomedical Campus Cambridge CB20QQ, Cambridge, UK
| | - Keith Burling
- NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Core Biochemical Assay Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Pete Acher
- Department of Urology, Southend Hospital, Essex, UK
| | - Jonathan Aning
- Department of Urology, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK
| | - Stuart McCracken
- Department of Urology, South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Trust, Sunderland, UK
| | - Toby Page
- Department of Urology, Newcastle Hospitals NHS Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Vincent J Gnanapragasam
- Department of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals Trust, Cambridge, UK. .,Urological Malignancies Programme CRUK & Cambridge Urology Translational Research and Clinical Trials Office, University of Cambridge Box 193, Cambridge Biomedical Campus Cambridge CB20QQ, Cambridge, UK. .,Academic Urology Group, Department of Surgery, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Filella X. Towards personalized prostate cancer screening. ADVANCES IN LABORATORY MEDICINE 2020; 1:20190027. [PMID: 37362554 PMCID: PMC10197357 DOI: 10.1515/almed-2019-0027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2019] [Accepted: 09/26/2019] [Indexed: 06/28/2023]
Abstract
The value of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in prostate cancer (PCa) screening is controversial. Contradictory results have been reported in the literature as to whether PSA-based screening reduces mortality. Also, some of the studies published are methodologically flawed. However, evidence consistently demonstrates that screening programs results in the identification of patients with indolent prostatic tumors which rate has increased. Controversy is not only about the value of PSA-based screening, but also about the age range for screening, risk groups based on baseline PSA, PSA ranges, or the use of other biomarkers (PHI, 4Kscore). At present, PCa screening in the general population is not recommended by most scientific societies, although it can be used after discussing the risks and benefits with the patient. When discussing the need to perform a screening, the risks of using screening (lack of specificity of PSA, overdiagnosis) must be weighed against the risks of not performing it (increased rate of patients with initial diagnosis of metastasis). In the recent years, a number of authors have advocated the use of personalized screening, which could change the risk/benefit evaluation, thereby making screening necessary on the basis of a set of individual factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xavier Filella
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics (CDB), IDIBAPS, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Ferro M, De Cobelli O, Lucarelli G, Porreca A, Busetto GM, Cantiello F, Damiano R, Autorino R, Musi G, Vartolomei MD, Muto M, Terracciano D. Beyond PSA: The Role of Prostate Health Index (phi). Int J Mol Sci 2020; 21:ijms21041184. [PMID: 32053990 PMCID: PMC7072791 DOI: 10.3390/ijms21041184] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2020] [Revised: 02/05/2020] [Accepted: 02/07/2020] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Widespread use of prostate specific antigen (PSA) in screening procedures allowed early identification of an increasing number of prostate cancers (PCas), mainly including indolent cancer. Availability of different therapeutic strategies which have a very different impact on the patient’s quality of life suggested a strong need for tools able to identify clinically significant cancer at diagnosis. Multi-parametric magnetic resonance showed very good performance in pre-biopsy diagnosis. However, it is an expensive tool and requires an experienced radiologist. In this context, a simple blood-based test is worth investigating. In this context, researchers focused their attention on the development of a laboratory test able to minimize overdiagnosis without losing the identification of aggressive tumors. Results: Recent literature data on PCa biomarkers revealed a clear tendency towards the use of panels of biomarkers or a combination of biomarkers and clinical variables. Phi, the 4Kscore, and Stockholm3 as circulating biomarkers and the Mi-prostate score, Exo DX Prostate, and Select MD-X as urinary biomarker-based tests have been developed. In this scenario, phi is worthy of attention as a noninvasive test significantly associated with aggressive PCa. Conclusions: Literature data showed that phi had good diagnostic performance to identify clinically significant (cs) PCa, suggesting that it could be a useful tool for personalized treatment decision-making. In this review, phi potentialities, limitations, and comparisons with other blood- and urinary-based tests were explored.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matteo Ferro
- Division of Urology, European Institute of Oncology, 20141 Milan, Italy; (M.F.); (O.D.C.); (G.M.)
| | - Ottavio De Cobelli
- Division of Urology, European Institute of Oncology, 20141 Milan, Italy; (M.F.); (O.D.C.); (G.M.)
| | - Giuseppe Lucarelli
- Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation—Urology, Andrology and Kidney Transplantation Unit, University of Bari, 70124 Bari, Italy;
| | - Angelo Porreca
- Department of Urology, Abano Terme Hospital, 35031 Padua, Italy;
| | | | - Francesco Cantiello
- Department of Urology, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy; (F.C.); (R.D.)
| | - Rocco Damiano
- Department of Urology, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy; (F.C.); (R.D.)
| | | | - Gennaro Musi
- Division of Urology, European Institute of Oncology, 20141 Milan, Italy; (M.F.); (O.D.C.); (G.M.)
| | - Mihai Dorin Vartolomei
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18–20, 1090 Vienna, Austria
- Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Sciences and Technology, 540139 Targu Mures, Romania
| | - Matteo Muto
- Radiotherapy Unit, “S. G. Moscati” Hospital, 83100 Avellino, Italy;
| | - Daniela Terracciano
- Department of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Naples “Federico II”, 8031 Naples, Italy
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +39-8174-6361-7
| |
Collapse
|