Multicenter Evaluation of the Prostate Health Index to Detect Aggressive Prostate Cancer in Biopsy Naïve Men

Established and emerging liquid biomarkers for prostate cancer detection: A review

Prostate cancer remains one of the most frequently diagnosed cancers among men in the world today. Since its introduction in 1987 and FDA approval in 1994, prostate specific antigen (PSA) has reduced prostate cancer specific mortality considerably. However, the positive and negative predictive value of PSA is less than ideal and can lead to the over-detection of clinically insignificant prostate cancer. In the search for better screening measures to identify this cohort, liquid biomarkers for prostate cancer have emerged. In this review we will explore the commonly used urine and blood based prostate cancer liquid biomarkers. We detail the mechanism of each test and the validation studies that underscore their efficacy. Additionally, we will examine each test's effect on shared decision making as well as their cost efficacy in clinical practice.

Evaluation of blood and urine based biomarkers for detection of clinically-significant prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Recognizing the limitations of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and the morbidity of prostate biopsies, several blood- and urine-based biomarkers have been proposed for pre-biopsy risk stratification. These assays aim to reduce the frequency of unnecessary biopsies (i.e., negative or Grade Group 1 [GG1]) while maintaining highly sensitive detection of clinically significant cancer (GG ≥ 2) prostate cancer.

METHODS

We reviewed the literature describing the use of currently available blood- and urine-based biomarkers for detection of GG ≥ 2 cancer, including the Prostate Health Index (PHI), 4Kscore, MyProstateScore (MPS), SelectMDx, ExoDx Prostate Intelliscore (EPI), and IsoPSA. To facilitate clinical application, we focused on the use of biomarkers as a post-PSA secondary test prior to biopsy, as proposed in clinical guidelines. Our outcomes included test performance measures-sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV)-as well as clinical outcomes resulting from biomarker use (i.e., unnecessary biopsies avoided, GG ≥ 2 cancers missed).

RESULTS

Contemporary validation data (2015-2023) reveal that currently available biomarkers provide ~15-50% specificity at a sensitivity of 90-95% for GG ≥ 2 PCa. Clinically, this indicates that secondary use of biomarker testing in men with elevated PSA could allow for avoidance of up to 15-50% of unnecessary prostate biopsies, while preserving detection of 90-95% of GG ≥ 2 cancers that would be detected under the traditional "biopsy all" approach.

CONCLUSIONS

The contemporary literature further supports the proposed role of post-PSA biomarker testing to reduce the use of invasive biopsy while maintaining highly sensitive detection of GG ≥ 2 cancer. Questions remain regarding the optimal application of biomarkers in combination or in sequence with mpMRI.

Development and Validation of an 18-Gene Urine Test for High-Grade Prostate Cancer

Importance

Benefits of prostate cancer (PCa) screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) alone are largely offset by excess negative biopsies and overdetection of indolent cancers resulting from the poor specificity of PSA for high-grade PCa (ie, grade group [GG] 2 or greater).

Objective

To develop a multiplex urinary panel for high-grade PCa and validate its external performance relative to current guideline-endorsed biomarkers.

Design, Setting, and Participants

RNA sequencing analysis of 58 724 genes identified 54 markers of PCa, including 17 markers uniquely overexpressed by high-grade cancers. Gene expression and clinical factors were modeled in a new urinary test for high-grade PCa (MyProstateScore 2.0 [MPS2]). Optimal models were developed in parallel without prostate volume (MPS2) and with prostate volume (MPS2+). The locked models underwent blinded external validation in a prospective National Cancer Institute trial cohort. Data were collected from January 2008 to December 2020, and data were analyzed from November 2022 to November 2023.

Exposure

Protocolized blood and urine collection and transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic prostate biopsy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Multiple biomarker tests were assessed in the validation cohort, including serum PSA alone, the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator, and the Prostate Health Index (PHI) as well as derived multiplex 2-gene and 3-gene models, the original 2-gene MPS test, and the 18-gene MPS2 models. Under a testing approach with 95% sensitivity for PCa of GG 2 or greater, measures of diagnostic accuracy and clinical consequences of testing were calculated. Cancers of GG 3 or greater were assessed secondarily.

Results

Of 761 men included in the development cohort, the median (IQR) age was 63 (58-68) years, and the median (IQR) PSA level was 5.6 (4.6-7.2) ng/mL; of 743 men included in the validation cohort, the median (IQR) age was 62 (57-68) years, and the median (IQR) PSA level was 5.6 (4.1-8.0) ng/mL. In the validation cohort, 151 (20.3%) had high-grade PCa on biopsy. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values were 0.60 using PSA alone, 0.66 using the risk calculator, 0.77 using PHI, 0.76 using the derived multiplex 2-gene model, 0.72 using the derived multiplex 3-gene model, and 0.74 using the original MPS model compared with 0.81 using the MPS2 model and 0.82 using the MPS2+ model. At 95% sensitivity, the MPS2 model would have reduced unnecessary biopsies performed in the initial biopsy population (range for other tests, 15% to 30%; range for MPS2, 35% to 42%) and repeat biopsy population (range for other tests, 9% to 21%; range for MPS2, 46% to 51%). Across pertinent subgroups, the MPS2 models had negative predictive values of 95% to 99% for cancers of GG 2 or greater and of 99% for cancers of GG 3 or greater.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, a new 18-gene PCa test had higher diagnostic accuracy for high-grade PCa relative to existing biomarker tests. Clinically, use of this test would have meaningfully reduced unnecessary biopsies performed while maintaining highly sensitive detection of high-grade cancers. These data support use of this new PCa biomarker test in patients with elevated PSA levels to reduce the potential harms of PCa screening while preserving its long-term benefits.

Prostate cancer biomarkers: from early diagnosis to precision treatment

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most prevalent cancer in men. In 2020, approximately 1,414,259 new cases were reported that accounted for 3,75,324 deaths (Sung et al. in CA 71:209-249, 2021). PCa is often asymptomatic at early stages; hence, routine screening and monitoring based on reliable biomarkers is crucial for early detection and assessment of cancer progression. Early diagnosis of disease is key step in reducing PCa-induced mortality. Biomarkers such as PSA have played vital role in reducing recent PCa deaths. Recent research has identified many other biomarkers and also refined PSA-based tests for non-invasive diagnosis of PCa in patients. Despite progress in screening methods, an important issue that influences treatment is heterogeneity of the cancer in different individuals, necessitating personalized treatment. Currently, focus is to identify biomarkers that can accurately diagnose PCa at early stage, indicate the stage of the disease, metastatic nature and chances of survival based on individual patient profile (Fig. 1). Fig. 1 Graphical abstract.

Liquid Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Current Status and Emerging Prospects

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.

VOC-based detection of prostate cancer using an electronic nose and ion mobility spectrometry: A novel urine-based approach

BACKGROUND

Many diseases leave behind specific metabolites which can be detected from breath and urine as volatile organic compounds (VOC). Our group previously described VOC-based methods for the detection of bladder cancer and urinary tract infections. This study investigated whether prostate cancer can be diagnosed from VOCs in urine headspace.

METHODS

For this pilot study, mid-stream urine samples were collected from 56 patients with histologically confirmed prostate cancer. A control group was formed with 53 healthy male volunteers matched for age who had recently undergone a negative screening by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal exam. Headspace measurements were performed with the electronic nose Cyranose 320TM . Statistical comparison was performed using principal component analysis, calculating Mahalanobis distance, and linear discriminant analysis. Further measurements were carried out with ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) to compare detection accuracy and to identify potential individual analytes. Bonferroni correction was applied for multiple testing.

RESULTS

The electronic nose yielded a sensitivity of 77% and specificity of 62%. Mahalanobis distance was 0.964, which is indicative of limited group separation. IMS identified a total of 38 individual analytical peaks, two of which showed significant differences between groups (p < 0.05). To discriminate between tumor and controls, a decision tree with nine steps was generated. This model led to a sensitivity of 98% and specificity of 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

VOC-based detection of prostate cancer seems feasible in principle. While the first results with an electronic nose show some limitations, the approach can compete with other urine-based marker systems. However, it seems less reliable than PSA testing. IMS is more accurate than the electronic nose with promising sensitivity and specificity, which warrants further research. The individual relevant metabolites identified by IMS should further be characterized using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry to facilitate potential targeted rapid testing.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Liquid Biomarkers for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Meta-analysis of Multiple Thresholds

CONTEXT

Many liquid biomarkers have entered clinical practice with the praise to improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), helping avoid unnecessary prostate biopsies.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of multianalyte biomarkers for csPCa detection using multiple thresholds.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A comprehensive literature search was done through PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus in March 2023 for prospective and retrospective studies reporting the diagnostic performance of liquid biomarkers for detecting csPCa. The outcomes of interest were the diagnostic performance of liquid biomarkers for csPCa detection and identification of optimal thresholds for each biomarker.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Overall, 49 studies were eligible for this meta-analysis. Using each representative threshold based on the Youden Index, the pooled sensitivity and specificity for detecting csPCa were 0.85 and 0.37 for prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3), 0.85 and 0.52 for prostate health index (PHI), 0.87 and 0.58 for four kallikrein (4K), 0.82 and 0.56 for SelectMDx, 0.85 and 0.54 for ExoDx, and 0.82 and 0.59 for mi prostate score (MPS), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio was highest for 4K (8.84), followed by MPS (7.0) and PHI (6.28). According to the meta-analysis incorporating multiple thresholds, the corresponding sensitivity was 0.77 for 4K, 0.69 for PHI, and 0.63 for PCA3; specificity was 0.72 for PHI, 0.70 for 4K, and 0.69 for PCA3.

CONCLUSIONS

Regarding the detection of csPCa, 4K had the highest diagnostic performance among the commercial liquid biomarkers. Based on the optimal thresholds calculated by the present meta-analysis, 4K had the highest sensitivity and PHI had the highest specificity for detecting csPCa. Nevertheless, clinical decision-making requires combination strategies between liquid and imaging biomarkers.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Novel biomarkers for prostate cancer detection were useful for more accurate diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer to avoid unnecessary biopsies.

Development and evaluation of the MiCheck® Prostate test for clinically significant prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

There is a clinical need to identify patients with an elevated PSA who would benefit from prostate biopsy due to the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer (CSCaP). We have previously reported the development of the MiCheck® Test for clinically significant prostate cancer. Here, we report MiCheck's further development and incorporation of the Roche Cobas standard clinical chemistry analyzer.

OBJECTIVES

To further develop and adapt the MiCheck® Prostate test so it can be performed using a standard clinical chemistry analyzer and characterize its performance using the MiCheck-01 clinical trial sample set.

DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS

About 358 patient samples from the MiCheck-01 US clinical trial were used for the development of the MiCheck® Prostate test. These consisted of 46 controls, 137 non-CaP, 62 non-CSCaP, and 113 CSCaP.

METHODS

Serum analyte concentrations for cellular growth factors were determined using custom-made Luminex-based R&D Systems multi-analyte kits. Analytes that can also be measured using standard chemistry analyzers were examined for their ability to contribute to an algorithm with high sensitivity for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Samples were then re-measured using a Roche Cobas analyzer for development of the final algorithm.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Logistic regression modeling with Monte Carlo cross-validation was used to identify Human Epidydimal Protein 4 (HE4) as an analyte able to significantly improve the algorithm specificity at 95% sensitivity. A final model was developed using analyte measurements from the Cobas analzyer.

RESULTS

The MiCheck® logistic regression model was developed and consisted of PSA, %free PSA, DRE, and HE4. The model differentiated clinically significant cancer from no cancer or not-clinically significant cancer with AUC of 0.85, sensitivity of 95%, and specificity of 50%. Applying the MiCheck® test to all evaluable 358 patients from the MiCheck-01 study demonstrated that up to 50% of unnecessary biopsies could be avoided while delaying diagnosis of only 5.3% of Gleason Score (GS) ≥3+4 cancers, 1.8% of GS≥4+3 cancers and no cancers of GS 8 to 10.

CONCLUSIONS

The MiCheck® Prostate test identifies clinically significant prostate cancer with high sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV). It can be performed in a clinical laboratory using a Roche Cobas clinical chemistry analyzer. The MiCheck® Prostate test could assist in reducing unnecessary prostate biopsies with a marginal number of patients experiencing a delayed diagnosis.

Baseline prostate health index risk category and risk category changes during active surveillance predict grade reclassification

BACKGROUND

It is not known whether baseline prostate health index (PHI) at the initiation of active surveillance (AS) or repeated PHI testing during AS is of clinical value after confirmatory biopsy in AS men followed with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI).

METHODS

We identified 382 AS patients with no greater than Grade Group 1 (GG1) prostate cancer on diagnostic and confirmatory biopsy, at least one mpMRI and PHI test, of which 241 had at least 2 PHI tests. Grade reclassification (GR) was defined as ≥GG2 on surveillance biopsy. PHI risk categories 1 to 4 were as defined by the manufacturer. Associations between baseline PHI risk category or baseline PSA density (PSAD), change in PHI risk categories over time or PSAD changes over time and GR were evaluated with multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models adjusted for age, Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System score and number of positive cores.

RESULTS

Men with baseline PHI scores in the highest risk categories had lower rates of GR-free survival (log-rank P < 0.001), as did those who increased in PHI risk category or remained in a high PHI risk category during surveillance (log-rank P = 0.032). On multivariable regression, baseline PHI risk category was a predictor of GR (risk category 4 [vs. 1] hazard ratio [HR] 2.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.32-5.66, P = 0.002, model C-index 0.764, Akaike Information Criterion [AIC] 797), as were PHI risk category changes over time (risk category 4 [vs. 1] HR 4.20, 95% CI 1.76-10.05, P = 0.002, C-index 0.759, AIC 489). Separate models with baseline PSAD and PSAD changes over time yielded C-indices of 0.709 (AIC 809) and 0.733 (AIC 495) respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline PHI risk category and PHI changes over time were both independent predictors of GR after confirmatory biopsy, but the added benefit over PSAD seemed modest. However, baseline PHI and PHI risk category changes provided clinically useful risk stratification for time to GR, so further evaluation of PHI's ability to help reduce the frequency of mpMRI and/or surveillance biopsies with more PHI data points over time may be warranted.

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.

Do PHI and PHI density improve detection of clinically significant prostate cancer only in the PSA gray zone?

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.

Biomarkers of Aggressive Prostate Cancer at Diagnosis

In the United States, prostate cancer (CaP) remains the second leading cause of cancer deaths in men. CaP is predominantly indolent at diagnosis, with a small fraction (25-30%) representing an aggressive subtype (Gleason score 7-10) that is prone to metastatic progression. This fact, coupled with the criticism surrounding the role of prostate specific antigen in prostate cancer screening, demonstrates the current need for a biomarker(s) that can identify clinically significant CaP and avoid unnecessary biopsy procedures and psychological implications of being diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer. Although several diagnostic biomarkers are available to clinicians, very few comparative trials have been performed to assess the clinical effectiveness of these biomarkers. It is of note, however, that a majority of these clinical trials have been over-represented by men of Caucasian origin, despite the fact that African American men have a 1.7 times higher incidence and 2.1 times higher rate of mortality from prostate cancer. Biomarkers for CaP diagnosis based on the tissue of origin include urine-based gene expression assays (PCA3, Select MDx, ExoDx Prostate IntelliScore, Mi-Prostate Score, PCA3-PCGEM1 gene panel), blood-based protein biomarkers (4K, PHI), and tissue-based DNA biomarker (Confirm MDx). Another potential direction that has emerged to aid in the CaP diagnosis include multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI), which in conjunction with clinically validated biomarkers may provide a better approach to predict clinically significant CaP at diagnosis. In this review, we discuss some of the adjunctive biomarker tests along with newer imaging modalities that are currently available to help clinicians decide which patients are at risk of having high-grade CaP on prostate biopsy with the emphasis on clinical utility of the tests across African American (AA) and Caucasian (CA) men.

Development of a novel nomogram for predicting clinically significant prostate cancer with the prostate health index and multiparametric MRI

INTRODUCTION

On prostate biopsy, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and the Prostate Health Index (PHI) have allowed prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).

METHODS

To predict the likelihood of csPCa, we created a nomogram based on a multivariate model that included PHI and mpMRI. We assessed 315 males who were scheduled for prostate biopsies.

RESULTS

We used the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS V2) to assess mpMRI and optimize PHI testing prior to biopsy. Univariate analysis showed that csPCa may be identified by PHI with a cut-off value of 77.77, PHID with 2.36, and PI-RADS with 3 as the best threshold. Multivariable logistic models for predicting csPCa were developed using PI-RADS, free PSA (fPSA), PHI, and prostate volume. A multivariate model that included PI-RADS, fPSA, PHI, and prostate volume had the best accuracy (AUC: 0.882). Decision curve analysis (DCA), which was carried out to verify the nomogram's clinical applicability, showed an ideal advantage (13.35% higher than the model that include PI-RADS only).

DISCUSSION

In conclusion, the nomogram based on PHI and mpMRI is a valuable tool for predicting csPCa while avoiding unnecessary biopsy as much as possible.

A high serum dehydroepiandrosterone concentration is a predictor of candidates for active surveillance in men with serum prostate-specific antigen < 10 ng/mL

Background

There is no consensus on the role of serum dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) concentrations in the detection of prostate cancer. This study examined the effectiveness of serum DHEA in predicting candidate patients for active surveillance (AS) prior to prostate biopsy.

Methods

A systematic prostate needle biopsy was performed in 203 men with serum PSA levels of < 10 ng/mL to detect prostate cancer. Serum DHEA concentrations were measured with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) just before biopsy. Patient’s age, serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, prostate volume, and serum DHEA concentrations were compared with pathological findings in multivariate analyses.

Results

The median patient’s age, PSA, serum DHEA concentration and prostate volume were 68 years, 5.5 ng/mL, 1654.7 pg/mL, and 31.2 mL, respectively. In a multivariate analysis, low PSA values, high serum DHEA concentrations, and large prostate volume were significant predictors of the patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) or prostate cancer with a Gleason score of ≤ 3 + 4 who are candidate for AS. The DHEA cut-off point for predicting BPH or prostate cancer with a Gleason score of ≤ 3 + 4 was 2188 pg/mL, with a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 33.7%, 96.0%, 98.4%, and 16.9%, respectively.

Conclusion

The study indicated that higher serum DHEA concentrations prior to prostate biopsy might predict the patients with BPH or prostate cancer with a Gleason score ≤ 3 + 4 who are candidate for AS, in men with PSA of < 10 ng/mL.

Clinical Utility of Prostate Health Index for Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer in Patients with PI-RADS 3 Lesions

The risk of prostate cancer (PCa) in prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 (PI-RADSv2) score-3 lesions is equivocal; it is regarded as an intermediate status of presented PCa. In this study, we evaluated the clinical utility of the prostate health index (PHI) for the diagnosis of PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) in patients with PI-RADSv2 score-3 lesions. The study cohort included patients who underwent a transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided, cognitive-targeted biopsy for PI-RADSv2 score-3 lesions between November 2018 and April 2021. Before prostate biopsy, the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) derivatives, such as total PSA (tPSA), [-2] proPSA (p2PSA) and free PSA (fPSA) were determined. The calculation equation of PHI is as follows: [(p2PSA/fPSA) × tPSA ½]. Using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the values of PSA derivatives measured by the area under the ROC curve (AUC) were compared. For this study, csPCa was defined as Gleason grade 2 or higher. Of the 392 patients with PI-RADSv2 score-3 lesions, PCa was confirmed in 121 (30.9%) patients, including 59 (15.1%) confirmed to have csPCa. Of all the PSA derivatives, PHI and PSA density (PSAD) showed better performance in predicting overall PCa and csPCa, compared with PSA (all p < 0.05). The AUC of the PHI for predicting overall PCa and csPCa were 0.807 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.710−0.906, p = 0.001) and 0.819 (95% CI: 0.723−0.922, p < 0.001), respectively. By the threshold of 30, PHI was 91.7% sensitive and 46.1% specific for overall PCa, and was 100% sensitive for csPCa. Using 30 as a threshold for PHI, 34.4% of unnecessary biopsies could have been avoided, at the cost of 8.3% of overall PCa, but would include all csPCa.

Construction and Comparison of Different Models in Detecting Prostate Cancer and Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer

Background

With the widespread adoption of prostatic-specific antigen (PSA) screening, the detection rates of prostate cancer (PCa) have increased. Due to the low specificity and high false-positive rate of serum PSA levels, it was difficult to diagnose PCa accurately. To improve the diagnosis of PCa and clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa), we established novel models on the basis of the prostate health index (PHI) and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the Asian population.

Methods

We retrospectively collected the clinical indicators of patients with TPSA at 4–20 ng/ml. Furthermore, mpMRI was performed using a 3.0-T scanner and reported in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.1 (PI-RADS). Univariable and multivariable logistic analyses were performed to construct the models. The performance of different models based on PSA derivatives, PHI derivatives, PI-RADS, and a combination of PHI derivatives and PI-RADS was evaluated.

Results

Among the 128 patients, 47 (36.72%) patients were diagnosed with CSPCa and 81 (63.28%) patients were diagnosed with non-CSPCa. Of the 81 (63.28%) patients, 8 (6.25%) patients were diagnosed with Gleason Grade 1 PCa and 73 (57.03%) patients were diagnosed with non-PCa. In the analysis of the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves in TPSA 4–20 ng/ml, the multivariable model for PCa was significantly larger than that for the model based on the PI-RADS (p = 0.004) and that for the model based on the PHI derivatives (p = 0.031) in diagnostic accuracy. The multivariable model for CSPCa was significantly larger than that for the model based on the PI-RADS (p = 0.003) and was non-significantly larger than that for the model based on the PHI derivatives (p = 0.061) in diagnostic accuracy. For PCa in TPSA 4–20 ng/ml, a multivariable model achieved the optimal diagnostic value at four levels of predictive variables. For CSPCa in TPSA 4–20 ng/ml, the multivariable model achieved the optimal diagnostic value at a sensitivity close to 90% and 80%.

Conclusions

The models combining PHI derivatives and PI-RADS performed better in detecting PCa and CSPCa than the models based on either PHI or PI-RADS.

Liquid biomarkers for early detection of prostate cancer and summary of available data for their use in African-American men

BACKGROUND

Several liquid biomarker tests have been developed to account for the limitations of prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening prior to prostate biopsy. African ancestry is an established risk factor for prostate cancer (PCa) and must be particularly considered when evaluating patients with liquid biomarkers. While multiple tests have been developed over decades of exploration, recent advances can help patients and physicians incorporate data into a broader clinical context.

METHODS

We sought to review currently available liquid biomarker tests in a practical, clinically directed fashion with particular focus on performance in men with African ancestry. We reviewed discovery and validation studies and highlight important considerations for each test.

RESULTS

We discuss the advantages and limitations of percent free PSA, Prostate Health Index, Progensa® PCA3, ExoDx® Prostate Test, SelectMDx®, 4Kscore® Test, and Mi-Prostate Score and summarize salient studies on their use. A literature review of evidence specifically for men with African ancestry was conducted and available studies were summarized.

CONCLUSIONS

Liquid biomarkers can be useful tools for aiding in risk stratification prior to prostate biopsy. Use of such tests should be individualized based on a thorough knowledge of supporting evidence and the goals of the patient and physician. Further study should prioritize evaluation of such biomarkers in men with African ancestry.

Prostate cancer biomarkers: a practical review based on different clinical scenarios

Traditionally, diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer (PCa) have been based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, digital rectal examination (DRE), and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy. Biomarkers have been introduced into clinical practice to reduce the overdiagnosis and overtreatment of low-grade PCa and increase the success of personalized therapies for high-grade and high-stage PCa. The purpose of this review was to describe available PCa biomarkers and examine their use in clinical practice. A nonsystematic literature review was performed using PubMed and Scopus to retrieve papers related to PCa biomarkers. In addition, we manually searched websites of major urological associations for PCa guidelines to evaluate available evidence and recommendations on the role of biomarkers and their potential contribution to PCa decision-making. In addition to PSA and its derivates, thirteen blood, urine, and tissue biomarkers are mentioned in various PCa guidelines. Retrospective studies have shown their utility in three main clinical scenarios: (1) deciding whether to perform a biopsy, (2) distinguishing patients who require active treatment from those who can benefit from active surveillance, and (3) defining a subset of high-risk PCa patients who can benefit from additional therapies after RP. Several validated PCa biomarkers have become commercially available in recent years. Guidelines now recommend offering these tests in situations in which the assay result, when considered in combination with routine clinical factors, is likely to affect management. However, the lack of direct comparisons and the unproven benefits, in terms of long-term survival and cost-effectiveness, prevent these biomarkers from being integrated into routine clinical use.

Biomarkers for prostate cancer detection and risk stratification

Although prostate cancer (PCa) is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in men, most patients do not die from the disease. Prostate specific antigen (PSA), the most widely used oncologic biomarker, has revolutionized screening and early detection, resulting in reduced proportion of patients presenting with advanced disease. However, given the inherent limitations of PSA, additional diagnostic and prognostic tools are needed to facilitate early detection and accurate risk stratification of disease. Serum, urine, and tissue-based biomarkers are increasingly being incorporated into the clinical care paradigm, but there is still a limited understanding of how to use them most effectively. In the current article, we review test characteristics and clinical performance data for both serum [4 K score, prostate health index (phi)] and urine [SelectMDx, ExoDx Prostate Intelliscore, MyProstateScore (MPS), and PCa antigen 3 (PCA3)] biomarkers to aid decisions regarding initial or repeat biopsies as well as tissue-based biomarkers (Confirm MDx, Decipher, Oncotype Dx, and Polaris) aimed at risk stratifying patients and identifying those patients most likely to benefit from treatment versus surveillance or monotherapy versus multi-modal therapy.

The Role and Significance of Bioumoral Markers in Prostate Cancer

The prostate is one of the most clinically accessible internal organs of the genitourinary tract in men. For decades, the only method of screening for prostate cancer (PCa) has been digital rectal examination of 1990s significantly increased the incidence and prevalence of PCa and consequently the morbidity and mortality associated with this disease. In addition, the different types of oncology treatment methods have been linked to specific complications and side effects, which would affect the patient's quality of life. In the first two decades of the 21st century, over-detection and over-treatment of PCa patients has generated enormous costs for health systems, especially in Europe and the United States. The Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) is still the most common and accessible screening blood test for PCa, but with low sensibility and specificity at lower values (<10 ng/mL). Therefore, in order to avoid unnecessary biopsies, several screening tests (blood, urine, or genetic) have been developed. This review analyzes the most used bioumoral markers for PCa screening and also those that could predict the evolution of metastases of patients diagnosed with PCa.

Combining prostate health index and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in estimating the histological diameter of prostate cancer

Background

Although multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is widely used to assess the volume of prostate cancer, it often underestimates the histological tumor boundary. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of combining prostate health index (PHI) and mpMRI to estimate the histological tumor diameter and determine the safety margin during treatment of prostate cancer.

Methods

We retrospectively enrolled 72 prostate cancer patients who underwent radical prostatectomy and had received PHI tests and mpMRI before surgery. We compared the discrepancy between histological and radiological tumor diameter stratified by Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score, and then assessed the influence of PHI on the discrepancy between low PI-RADS (2 or 3) and high PI-RADS (4 or 5) groups.

Results

The mean radiological and histological tumor diameters were 1.60 cm and 2.13 cm, respectively. The median discrepancy between radiological and histological tumor diameter of PI-RADS 4 or 5 lesions was significantly greater than that of PI-RADS 2 or 3 lesions (0.50 cm, IQR (0.00–0.90) vs. 0.00 cm, IQR (−0.10–0.20), p = 0.02). In the low PI-RADS group, the upper limit of the discrepancy was 0.2 cm; so the safety margin could be set at 0.1 cm. In the high PI-RADS group, the upper limits of the discrepancy were 1.2, 1.6, and 2.2 cm in men with PHI < 30, 30–60, and > 60; so the safety margin could be set at 0.6, 0.8, and 1.1 cm, respectively.

Conclusions

Radiological tumor diameter on mpMRI often underestimated the histological tumor diameter, especially for PI-RADS 4 or 5 lesions. Combining mpMRI and PHI may help to better estimate the histological tumor diameter.

Robust and flexible inference for the covariate-specific receiver operating characteristic curve

Diagnostic tests are of critical importance in health care and medical research. Motivated by the impact that atypical and outlying test outcomes might have on the assessment of the discriminatory ability of a diagnostic test, we develop a robust and flexible model for conducting inference about the covariate-specific receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve that safeguards against outlying test results while also accommodating for possible nonlinear effects of the covariates. Specifically, we postulate a location-scale regression model for the test outcomes in both the diseased and nondiseased populations, combining additive regression B-splines and M-estimation for the regression function, while the distribution of the error term is estimated via a weighted empirical distribution function of the standardized residuals. The results of the simulation study show that our approach successfully recovers the true covariate-specific area under the ROC curve on a variety of conceivable test outcomes contamination scenarios. Our method is applied to a dataset derived from a prostate cancer study where we seek to assess the ability of the Prostate Health Index to discriminate between men with and without Gleason 7 or above prostate cancer, and if and how such discriminatory capacity changes with age.

Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy in the detection of high-grade prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve patients with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer who underwent the Select MDx test

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to externally validate the diagnostic accuracy of the Select MDx test for Significant prostate cancer (Sig PCa) (ISUP > 1), in a contemporaneous, prospective, multicenter cohort with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) between 3 and 10 ng/ml and a non-suspicious digital rectal examination.

METHODS AND PARTICIPANTS

For all enrolled patients, the Select Mdx test, the risk calculator ERSPC3 + DRE, and a prostatic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were carried out. Subsequently, a systematic 12-core trans-rectal biopsy and a targeted biopsy, in the case of a prostate imaging-reporting and data system (PIRADS) > 2 lesion (max three lesions), were performed. To assess the accuracy of the Select MDx test in the detection of clinically Sig PCa, the test sensitivity was evaluated. Secondary objectives were specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), and area under the curve (AUC). A direct comparison with the ERSPC + DRE risk calculator and MRI were also performed. We also studied the predictive ability to diagnose Sig PCa from the combination of the Select MDx test with MRI using clinical decision-curve analysis.

RESULTS

There were 163 patients enrolled after meeting the inclusion criteria and study protocol. The Select MDx test showed a sensitivity of 76.9% (95% CI, 63.2-87.5), 49.6% specificity (95% CI, 39.9-59.2), 82.09% (95% CI, 70.8-90.4) NPV, and 41.67% (95% CI, 31.7-52.2) PPV for the diagnosis of Sig PCa. COR analysis was also performed, which showed an AUC of 0.63 (95% CI, 0.56-0.71). There were no differences in the accuracy of Select MDx, ERSPC + DRE, or MRI. The combination of Select MDX + MRI showed the highest impact in the decision-curve analysis, with an NPV of 93%.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed a worse performance for the SelectMdx test than previously reported, within a cohort of patients with a PSA 3-10 ng/ml and a normal DRE, with results similar to those from ERSPC + DRE RC and MRI, but with an improvement in the usual PSA pathway. A combination of the Select Mdx test and MRI could improve accuracy, but studies specifically evaluating this scenario with a cost-effective analysis are needed.

Prostate Cancer in Older Adults: Risk of Clinically Meaningful Disease, the Role of Screening and Special Considerations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer in men in the USA and several studies suggest more aggressive disease in older patients. However, screening remains controversial, especially in the older patient population.

RECENT FINDINGS

Aggressive prostate cancers are more common in older men. Screening trial results are conflicting but data suggest an improvement in prostate cancer mortality and increased detection of metastatic disease with screening. When PSA is utilized with multiparametric MRI and biomarker assays, patients at significant risk of clinically meaningful prostate cancer can be appropriately selected for biopsy. A thoughtful and individualized approach is central when considering prostate cancer screening in older men. This approach includes life expectancy estimation, use of appropriate geriatric assessment tools, use of multiparametric MRI and biomarkers in addition to PSA, and most importantly shared decision-making with patients.

Biomarkers for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: contemporary clinical data and future directions

Use of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing for early detection of prostate cancer appears to reduce cancer-specific mortality. Due to the limited specificity of PSA for clinically significant [Grade Group (GG) ≥2] cancer, however, screening carries substantial risks, including frequent unnecessary prostate biopsies and overdetection of non-aggressive cancers. To that end, serum and urine biomarkers with improved specificity for GG ≥2 cancer have been proposed for clinical use following PSA. In the current article, we present clinical validation data for five such biomarkers: PHI, 4Kscore, SelectMDx, ExoDx, and MPS. For all studies, we specify the study population (overall biopsy referral vs. pre-specified PSA ranges), previous biopsy status (biopsy-naïve vs. previous negative biopsy), and the proportion of subjects diagnosed with GG ≥2 cancer. Outcomes include test performance characteristics: sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV). Published data were used to compute the number of unnecessary biopsies avoided and number of GG ≥2 cancers missed if the biomarker had been used clinically to select for prostate biopsy. The evidence review is preceded by a primer on these and other clinically-relevant summary statistics.

A 25-year perspective on evaluation and understanding of biomarkers in urologic cancers

The past 25 years have witnessed an explosion of investigative attempts to identify clinically useful biomarkers which can have meaningful impacts for patients with urologic cancers. However, in spite of the enormous amount of research aiming to identify markers with the hope of impacting patient care, only a handful have proven to have true clinical utility. Improvements in targeted imaging, pan-omics evaluation, and genetic sequencing at the tissue and single-cell levels have yielded many potential targets for continued biomarker investigation. This article, as one in this series for the 25th Anniversary Issue of Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, serves to give a perspective on our progress and failures over the past quarter-century in our highest volume urologic cancers: prostate, bladder, and kidney cancers.

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.

Prostate Cancer Liquid Biopsy Biomarkers' Clinical Utility in Diagnosis and Prognosis

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer in men worldwide. The current gold standard for diagnosing PCa relies on a transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic core needle biopsy indicated after detection changes in a digital rectal examination (DRE) and elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level in the blood serum. PSA is a marker produced by prostate cells, not just cancer cells. Therefore, an elevated PSA level may be associated with other symptoms such as benign prostatic hyperplasia or inflammation of the prostate gland. Due to this marker's low specificity, a common problem is overdiagnosis, which leads to unnecessary biopsies and overtreatment. This is associated with various treatment complications (such as bleeding or infection) and generates unnecessary costs. Therefore, there is no doubt that the improvement of the current procedure by applying effective, sensitive and specific markers is an urgent need. Several non-invasive, cost-effective, high-accuracy liquid biopsy diagnostic biomarkers such as Progensa PCA3, MyProstateScore ExoDx, SelectMDx, PHI, 4K, Stockholm3 and ConfirmMDx have been developed in recent years. This article compares current knowledge about them and their potential application in clinical practice.

Performance of prostate health index and PSA density in a diverse biopsy‐naïve cohort with mpMRI for detecting significant prostate cancer

Objective

To compare Prostate Health Index (PHI) and prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) density as secondary tests after multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in improving the detection accuracy of Gleason grade group (GG) 2‐5 prostate cancer (PCa) and in decreasing unnecessary biopsies in a multiethnic biopsy‐naïve population.

Methods

From February 2017 to February 2020, we recruited consecutive biopsy‐naïve men in participating urology clinics for elevated PSA levels. They all had a PHI score, mpMRI, and prostate biopsy. Experienced genitourinary radiologists read all mpMRI studies based on PIRADS version 2.0. Logistic regression models were used to generate receiver operating characteristic curves. Models were tested for effect modification between Race (Black vs White) and both PHI and PSA density, and Race and PIRADS to determine if race impacted their prediction accuracy. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of PHI and PSA density thresholds were calculated by PIRADS scores. The primary outcome was GG2‐5 PCa, that is, Gleason score ≥3 + 4.

Results

The study included 143 men, of which 65 (45.5%) were self‐reported Black. Median age was 62.0 years and 55 men (38.4%) had GG2‐5 PCa. Overall, 18.1% had PIRADS 1‐2, 32.9% had PIRADS 3, and 49.0% had PIRADS 4‐5. For the binary logistic regressions, the interactions between PIRADS and Race (P = .08), Log (PHI) and Race (P = .17), and Log (PSA density) and Race (P = .42) were not statistically significant. Within PIRADS 3 lesions, a PHI ≥49 prevented unnecessary biopsies in 55% of men and missed no GG2‐5 PCa, yielding a negative predictive value of 100%. There was no reliable PHI or PSA density threshold to avoid PCa biopsies in PIRADS 1‐2 or 4‐5.

Conclusions

PHI and PSA density can be used after mpMRI to improve the detection of GG2‐5 PCa in a biopsy‐naïve cohort. PHI may be superior to PSA density in PIRADS 3 lesions by avoiding 55% of unnecessary biopsies. Using both PHI and PSA density in series may further increase specificity and lead to fewer unnecessary biopsies, but further larger studies are warranted to determine the optimal threshold of each biomarker.

Exploring Prostate Cancer Patients' Interest and Preferences for Receiving Genetic Risk Information About Cancer Aggressiveness

The number of cases of aggressive prostate cancer is increasing. Differentiating between aggressive and indolent cases has resulted in increased difficulty for the physician and patient to decide on the best treatment option. Due to this challenge, efforts are underway to profile genetic risk for prostate cancer aggressiveness, which may help physicians and patients at risk for developing aggressive prostate cancer to select an appropriate treatment option. This study explores patients’ interest in receiving genetic results, preference for how genetic risk information should be communicated, and willingness to share results with adult male first-degree relatives (FDRs). A nine-item survey was adapted to assess their beliefs and attitudes about genetic testing for prostate cancer aggressiveness. In addition, participants (n = 50) responded to hypothetical scenarios and questions associated with perceived importance of risk disclosure, preferences for receiving genetic risk information, and sharing of results with FDRs. As the hypothetical risk estimate for aggressive prostate cancer increased, patients’ willingness to receive genetic risk information increased. This study found that most patients preferred receiving genetic risk education in the form of a DVD (76%), one-page informational sheet (75%), or educational booklet (70%). Almost all patients (98%) reported that they would be willing to share their test results with FDRs. The results of this study highlight prostate cancer patients’ desire to receive and share genetic risk information. Future research should focus on assessing the long-term benefits of receiving genetic information for prostate cancer patients and implications of sharing this information with FDRs.

Correlation between Gleason score distribution and Prostate Health Index in patients with prostate-specific antigen values of 2.5-10 ng/mL

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.

Diagnostic accuracy of [-2]proPSA versus Gleason score and Prostate Health Index versus Gleason score for the determination of aggressive prostate cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of [-2]proPSA (p2PSA) and the Prostate Health Index compared to the Gleason score in determining the aggressiveness of prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in men. However, the utility of currently available biomarkers for determining the aggressive form of the disease remains unknown. This review sought to determine the diagnostic accuracy of two new biomarkers in determining the aggressive form of prostate cancer.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Diagnostic accuracy studies that enrolled men of any age and any prostate specific antigen (PSA) level with histologically confirmed prostate cancer in which Prostate Health Index and p2PSA were assessed in comparison to Gleason score for the determination of aggressive prostate cancer were considered for inclusion. There was no time limitation on study inclusion.

METHODS

A three-step search strategy was utilized to identify both published and unpublished studies in the English language in the following sources: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Web of Science, Google Scholar, MedNar, and SIGLE. Databases were searched from inception to January 2019. Study selection, critical appraisal, data extraction, and data synthesis were done according to the approach recommended by JBI.

RESULTS

A total of 12 studies (n = 8462) that recruited men with aggressive prostate cancer were considered in this review. The majority of included subjects had a total PSA level of 2 to 10ng/mL. The sensitivity of the Prostate Health Index ranged from 67% to 97% while specificity ranged from 6% to 64%. At a Prostate Health Index threshold of 25 and below (three studies, n = 3222), pooled sensitivity was 97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95% to 98%) and specificity was 10% (95% CI, 6% to 16%). At a Prostate Health Index threshold of between 26 and 35 (six studies, n = 6030), pooled sensitivity was 87% (95% CI, 8% to 91%) and specificity was 45% (95% CI, 39% to 50%). At a Prostate Health Index threshold of 36 and above (five studies, n = 1476), pooled sensitivity was 72% (95% CI, 64% to 79%) and specificity was 74% (95% CI, 68% to 80%). Only one study assessed p2PSA. Sensitivity ranged from 80% to 95%, and specificity ranged from 9.9% to 27.9% with increasing threshold values from 7.9 to 10.9ng/mL.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, both Prostate Health Index and p2PSA have acceptable accuracy for the determination of the likelihood of aggressive prostate cancer. However, the inverse relationship between sensitivity and specificity makes it difficult to determine an optimum cut-off value for positivity. Further research is warranted to determine their utility in the management of prostate cancer.

Clinical use of the SelectMDx urinary-biomarker test with or without mpMRI in prostate cancer diagnosis: a prospective, multicenter study in biopsy-naïve men

Background

Risk stratification in men with suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) requires reliable diagnostic tests, not only to identify high-grade PCa, also to minimize the overdetection of low-grade PCa, and reduction of “unnecessary” prostate MRIs and biopsies. This study aimed to evaluate the SelectMDx test to detect high-grade PCa in biopsy-naïve men. Subsequently, to assess combinations of SelectMDx test and multi-parametric (mp) MRI and its potential impact on patient selection for prostate biopsy.

Methods

This prospective multicenter diagnostic study included 599 biopsy-naïve patients with prostate-specific antigen level ≥3 ng/ml. All patients underwent a SelectMDx test and mpMRI before systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUSGB). Patients with a suspicious mpMRI also had an in-bore MR-guided biopsy (MRGB). Histopathologic outcome of TRUSGB and MRGB was used as reference standard. High-grade PCa was defined as ISUP Grade Group (GG) ≥ 2. The primary outcome was the detection rates of low- and high-grade PCa and number of biopsies avoided in four strategies, i.e., (1) SelectMDx test-only, (2) mpMRI-only, (3) SelectMDx test followed by mpMRI when SelectMDx test was positive (conditional strategy), and (4) SelectMDx test and mpMRI in all (joint strategy). A positive SelectMDx test outcome was a risk score of ≥−2.8. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to assess clinical utility.

Results

Prevalence of high-grade PCa was 31% (183/599). Thirty-eight percent (227/599) of patients had negative SelectMDx test in whom biopsy could be avoided. Low-grade PCa was not detected in 35% (48/138) with missing 10% (18/183) high-grade PCa. Yet, mpMRI-only could avoid 49% of biopsies, not detecting 4.9% (9/183) of high-grade PCa. The conditional strategy reduces the number of mpMRIs by 38% (227/599), avoiding biopsy in 60% (357/599) and missing 13% (24/183) high-grade PCa. Low-grade PCa was not detected in 58% (80/138). DCA showed the highest net benefit for the mpMRI-only strategy, followed by the conditional strategy at-risk thresholds >10%.

Conclusions

SelectMDx test as a risk stratification tool for biopsy-naïve men avoids unnecessary biopsies in 38%, minimizes low-grade PCa detection, and misses only 10% high-grade PCa. Yet, using mpMRI in all patients had the highest net benefit, avoiding biopsy in 49% and missing 4.9% of high-risk PCa. However, if mpMRI availability is limited or expensive, using mpMRI-only in SelectMDx test positive patients is a good alternative strategy.

A panel of selected serum protein biomarkers for the detection of aggressive prostate cancer

Background: Current PSA-based tests used to detect prostate cancer (PCa) lack sufficient specificity, leading to significant overdetection and overtreatment. Our previous studies showed that serum fucosylated PSA (Fuc-PSA) and soluble TEK receptor tyrosine kinase (Tie-2) had the ability to predict aggressive (AG) PCa. Additional biomarkers are needed to address this significant clinical problem. Methods: A comprehensive Pubmed search followed by multiplex immunoassays identified candidate biomarkers associated with AG PCa. Subsequently, multiplex and lectin-based immunoassays were applied to a case-control set of sera from subjects with AG PCa, low risk PCa, and non-PCa (biopsy negative). These candidate biomarkers were further evaluated for their ability as panels to complement the prostate health index (phi) in detecting AG PCa. Results: When combined through logistic regression, two panel of biomarkers achieved the best performance: 1) phi, Fuc-PSA, SDC1, and GDF-15 for the detection of AG from low risk PCa and 2) phi, Fuc-PSA, SDC1, and Tie-2 for the detection of AG from low risk PCa and non-PCa, with noticeable improvements in ROC analysis over phi alone (AUCs: 0.942 vs 0.872, and 0.934 vs 0.898, respectively). At a fixed sensitivity of 95%, the panels improved specificity with statistical significance in detecting AG from low risk PCa (76.0% vs 56%, p=0.029), and from low risk PCa and non-PCa (78.2% vs 65.5%, p=0.010). Conclusions: Multivariate panels of serum biomarkers identified in this study demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement over the performance of phi, and warrant further clinical validation, which may contribute to the management of PCa.

Biomarkers for prostate cancer: prostate-specific antigen and beyond

In recent years, several new biomarkers supplementing the role of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) have become available for men with prostate cancer. Although widely used in an ad hoc manner, the role of PSA in screening asymptomatic men for prostate cancer is controversial. Several expert panels, however, have recently recommended limited PSA screening following informed consent in average-risk men, aged 55-69 years. As a screening test for prostate cancer however, PSA has limited specificity and leads to overdiagnosis which in turn results in overtreatment. To increase specificity and reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies, biomarkers such as percent free PSA, prostate health index (PHI) or the 4K score may be used, while Progensa PCA3 may be measured to reduce the number of repeat biopsies in men with a previously negative biopsy. In addition to its role in screening, PSA is also widely used in the management of patients with diagnosed prostate cancer such as in surveillance following diagnosis, monitoring response to therapy and in combination with both clinical and histological criteria in risk stratification for recurrence. For determining aggressiveness and predicting outcome, especially in low- or intermediate-risk men, tissue-based multigene tests such as Decipher, Oncotype DX (Prostate), Prolaris and ProMark, may be used. Emerging therapy predictive biomarkers include AR-V7 for predicting lack of response to specific anti-androgens (enzalutamide, abiraterone), BRAC1/2 mutations for predicting benefit from PARP inhibitor and PORTOS for predicting benefit from radiotherapy. With the increased availability of multiple biomarkers, personalised treatment for men with prostate cancer is finally on the horizon.

Advances in the selection of patients with prostate cancer for active surveillance

Early identification and management of prostate cancer completely changed with the discovery of prostate-specific antigen. However, improved detection has also led to overdiagnosis and consequently overtreatment of patients with low-risk disease. Strategies for the management of patients using active surveillance - the monitoring of clinically insignificant disease until intervention is warranted - were developed in response to this issue. The success of this approach is critically dependent on the accurate selection of patients who are predicted to be at the lowest risk of prostate cancer mortality. The Epstein criteria for clinically insignificant prostate cancer were first published in 1994 and have been repeatedly validated for risk-stratification and selection for active surveillance over the past few decades. Current active surveillance programmes use modified criteria with 30-50% of patients receiving treatment at 10 years. Nonetheless, tools for prostate cancer diagnosis have continued to evolve with improvements in biopsy format and targeting, advances in imaging technologies such as multiparametric MRI, and the identification of serum-, tissue- and urine-based biomarkers. These advances have the potential to further improve the identification of men with low-risk disease who can be appropriately managed using active surveillance.

Prospective Validation of Pentraxin-3 as a Novel Serum Biomarker to Predict the Risk of Prostate Cancer in Patients Scheduled for Prostate Biopsy

PURPOSE

To test and internally validate serum Pentraxin-3 (PTX3) levels as a potential PCa biomarker to predict prostate biopsy (PBx) results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Serum PSA and serum PTX3 were prospectively assessed in patients scheduled for PBx at our Institution due to increased serum PSA levels or abnormal digital rectal examination. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression analysis, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and decision curve analysis (DCA), were used to test the accuracy of serum PTX3 in predicting anyPCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined as Gleason Grade (GG) ≥ 2.

RESULTS

Among the 455 eligible patients, PCa was detected in 49% and csPCa in 25%. During univariate analysis, PTX3 outperformed other variables in predicting both anyPCa and csPCa. The addition of PTX3 to multivariable models based on standard clinical variables, significantly increased each model's predictive accuracy for anyPCa (AUC from 0.73 to 0.82; p < 0.001) and csPCa (AUC from 0.79 to 0.83; p < 0.001). At DCA, PTX3, and PTX3, density showed higher net benefit than PSA and PSA density and increased the net benefit of multivariable models in deciding when to perform PBx.

CONCLUSIONS

Serum PTX3 levels might be of clinical utility in predicting prostate biopsy results. Should our findings be confirmed, this novel reflex test could be used to reduce the number and burden of unnecessary prostate biopsies.

The emerging landscape of tumor marker panels for the identification of aggressive prostate cancer: the perspective through bibliometric analysis of an Italian translational working group in uro-oncology

Molecular heterogeneity and availability of different therapeutic strategies are relevant clinical features of prostate cancer. On this basis, there is an urgent need to identify prognostic and predictive biomarkers for an individualized therapeutic approach. In this context, researchers focused their attention on biomarkers able to discriminate potential life-threatening from organ-confined disease. Such biomarker could provide aid in clinical decision making, helping to choose the treatment which ensures the best results in terms of patient survival and quality of life. To address this need, many new laboratory tests have been proposed, with a clear tendency to use panels of combined biomarkers. In this review we evaluate current data on the application in clinical practice of the most promising laboratory tests: Phi, 4K score and Stockholm 3 as circulating biomarkers, Mi-prostate score, Exo DX Prostate and Select MD-X as urinary biomarkers, Confirm MDx, Oncotype Dx, Prolaris and Decipher as tissue biomarkers. In particular, the ability of these tests in the identification of clinically significant PCa and their potential use for precision medicine have been explored in this review.

Performance of Prostate Health Index in Biopsy Naïve Black Men

PURPOSE

The Prostate Health Index is validated for prostate cancer detection but has not been well validated for Gleason grade group 2-5 prostate cancer detection in Black men. We hypothesize that the Prostate Health Index has greater accuracy than prostate specific antigen for detection of Gleason grade group 2-5 prostate cancer. We estimated probability of overall and Gleason grade group 2-5 prostate cancer across previously established Prostate Health Index ranges and identified Prostate Health Index cutoffs that maximize specificity for Gleason grade group 2-5 prostate cancer with sensitivity >90%.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We recruited a "cancer-free" Black control cohort (135 patients) and a cohort of biopsy naïve Black men (158) biopsied for elevated prostate specific antigen. Descriptive statistics compared the prostate cancer cases and controls and the frequency of Gleason grade group 2-5 prostate cancer across Prostate Health Index scores. Receiver operating characteristics compared the discrimination of prostate specific antigen, Prostate Health Index and other prostate specific antigen related biomarkers. Sensitivity and specificity for Gleason grade group 2-5 prostate cancer detection were assessed at prostate specific antigen and Prostate Health Index thresholds alone and in series.

RESULTS

Of biopsied subjects 32.9% had Gleason grade group 2-5 prostate cancer. In Blacks with prostate specific antigen from 4.0-10.0 ng/ml, Prostate Health Index and prostate specific antigen had similar discrimination for Gleason grade group 2-5 prostate cancer (0.63 vs 0.57, p=0.27). In Blacks with prostate specific antigen ≤10.0, a threshold of prostate specific antigen ≥4.0 had 90.4% sensitivity for Gleason grade group 2-5 prostate cancer; a threshold of prostate specific antigen ≥4.0 with Prostate Health Index ≥35.0 in series avoided unnecessary biopsy in 33.0% of men but missed 17.3% of Gleason grade group 2-5 prostate cancer. Prostate specific antigen ≥4.0 with Prostate Health Index ≥28.0 in series spared biopsy in 17.9%, while maintaining 90.4% sensitivity of Gleason grade group 2-5 prostate cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The Prostate Health Index has moderate accuracy in detecting Gleason grade group 2-5 prostate cancer in Blacks, but Prostate Health Index ≥28.0 can be safely used to avoid some unnecessary biopsies in Blacks.

Use of the MyProstateScore Test to Rule Out Clinically Significant Cancer: Validation of a Straightforward Clinical Testing Approach

PURPOSE

The MyProstateScore test was validated for improved detection of clinically significant (grade group ≥2) prostate cancer relative to prostate specific antigen based risk calculators. We sought to validate an optimal MyProstateScore threshold for clinical use in ruling out grade group ≥2 cancer in men referred for biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Biopsy naïve men provided post-digital rectal examination urine prior to biopsy. MyProstateScore was calculated using the validated, locked multivariable model including only serum prostate specific antigen, urinary prostate cancer antigen 3 and urinary TMPRSS2:ERG. The MyProstateScore threshold approximating 95% sensitivity for grade group ≥2 cancer was identified in a training cohort, and performance was measured in 2 external validation cohorts. We assessed the 1) overall biopsy referral population and 2) population meeting guideline based testing criteria (ie, prostate specific antigen 3-10, or <3 with suspicious digital rectal examination).

RESULTS

Validation cohorts were prospectively enrolled from academic (977 patients, median prostate specific antigen 4.5, IQR 3.1-6.0) and community (548, median prostate specific antigen 4.9, IQR 3.7-6.8) settings. In the overall validation population (1,525 patients), 338 men (22%) had grade group ≥2 cancer on biopsy. The MyProstateScore threshold of 10 provided 97% sensitivity and 98% negative predictive value for grade group ≥2 cancer. MyProstateScore testing would have prevented 387 unnecessary biopsies (33%), while missing only 10 grade group ≥2 cancers (3.0%). In 1,242 patients meeting guideline based criteria, MyProstateScore ≤10 provided 96% sensitivity and 97% negative predictive value, and would have prevented 32% of unnecessary biopsies, missing 3.7% of grade group ≥2 cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large, clinically pertinent biopsy referral population, MyProstateScore ≤10 provided exceptional sensitivity and negative predictive value for ruling out grade group ≥2 cancer. This straightforward secondary testing approach would reduce the use of more costly and invasive procedures after screening with prostate specific antigen.

Peri-prostatic adipose tissue measurements using MRI predict prostate cancer aggressiveness in men undergoing radical prostatectomy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of peri-prostatic adipose tissue (PPAT) measurements using preoperative MRI on the prediction of prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness in men undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study on 179 consecutive patients receiving RP from June 2016 to October 2018. Clinical characteristics were collected. PPAT measurements including peri-prostatic fat area (PPFA) and peri-prostatic fat area to prostate area (PA) ratio (PPFA/PA) were calculated by MRI. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of PCa lymph node metastasis (LNM). The predictive performance was estimated through ROC curves. Nomograms were created based on the predictors.

RESULTS

Pathologic Gleason score positively correlated with digital rectal examination (DRE), PSA, PPFA/PA, P504S, and Ki-67 (all P < 0.05). ROC curves revealed that high PPFA and high PPFA/PA were associated with LNM (both P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis revealed that high PPFA/PA, pathologic Gleason score, pT stage, and Ki-67 were independently predictive of LNM. The nomograms were created and the C-index was 0.945.

CONCLUSIONS

PPFA/PA is an independent predictor for LNM along with Gleason score, pT stage, and Ki-67. PPFA/PA may help predict LNM in men undergoing RP, thus providing adjunctive information for therapeutic strategy and prognosis.

Clinical utility of current biomarkers for prostate cancer detection

Although prostate-specific antigen (PSA) remains the most used test to detect prostate cancer (PCa), the limited specificity and an elevated rate of overdiagnosis are the main problems associated with PSA testing. Over the last three decades, a large body of evidence has indicated that PSA screening methods for PCa are problematic, although PSA screening significantly reduces PCa-specific mortality. A number of novel biomarkers have been introduced to overcome these limitations of PSA in the clinical setting. These biomarkers have demonstrated an increased ability to select patients for biopsy and identify men at risk for clinically significant PCa. Although a number of assays require further validation, initial data are promising. Forthcoming results will ultimately determine the clinical utility and commercial availability of these assays. Extensive efforts have recently been made to identify and commercialize novel PCa biomarkers for more effective detection of PCa, either alone or in combination with currently available clinical tools. This review highlights the role of existing and promising serum and urinary biomarkers for the detection and prognostication of PCa before prostate biopsy.

Prostate cancer biomarkers and multiparametric MRI: is there a role for both in prostate cancer management?

Several advancements have been made in recent years with regards to the detection and evaluation of prostate cancer (PCa). The low specificity of prostate specific antigen (PSA) has left much to be desired in a test, but a boom in novel biomarkers has made screening and surveillance more complicated. Several attempts at identifying a niche for these tests has helped somewhat, but much is still undetermined about the benefit that each test provides. In addition to laboratory tests, advancements in multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and PIRADSv.2 scoring have provided significant benefit to the evaluation of PCa. With the widespread use of prostate imaging, it is important to re-evaluate the impact of novel biomarkers in the context of furthering PCa screening and management. In this review, we aim to assess the influence mpMRI has on the role of nine different novel biomarkers in the detection and evaluation of PCa. We performed a review of current peer-reviewed literature to assess this question. Much data has been published on the role of these tests, allowing for their placement into one of three best-fit categories: tests for biopsy-naïve men (Prostate Health Index, Mi Prostate Score, 4K Score); tests for men with prior negative biopsies (ConfirmMDx, Progensa PCA3); and men on active surveillance (OncotypeDx, Prolaris, Decipher). Data on the role of these tests with the use of mpMRI have not been comprehensive and excludes several of the markers. More research is needed to determine the combined impact mpMRI and the novel biomarkers on the evaluation and management of PCa.

Commercialized Blood-, Urinary- and Tissue-Based Biomarker Tests for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Prognosis

In the diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer (PCa), the serum prostate-specific antigen test is widely used but is associated with low specificity. Therefore, blood-, urinary- and tissue-based biomarker tests have been developed, intended to be used in the diagnostic and prognostic setting of PCa. This review provides an overview of commercially available biomarker tests developed to be used in several clinical stages of PCa management. In the diagnostic setting, the following tests can help selecting the right patients for initial and/or repeat biopsy: PHI, 4K, MiPS, SelectMDx, ExoDx, Proclarix, ConfirmMDx, PCA3 and PCMT. In the prognostic setting, the Prolaris, OncotypeDx and Decipher test can help in risk-stratification of patients regarding treatment decisions. Following, an overview is provided of the studies available comparing the performance of biomarker tests. However, only a small number of recently published head-to-head comparison studies are available. In contrast, recent research has focused on the use of biomarker tests in relation to the (complementary) use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in PCa diagnosis.

Prostate Cancer Biomarker Development: National Cancer Institute's Early Detection Research Network Prostate Cancer Collaborative Group Review

Prostate cancer remains the most common non-skin cancer and second leading cause of death among men in the United States. Although progress has been made in diagnosis and risk assessment, many clinical questions remain regarding early identification of prostate cancer and management. The early detection of aggressive disease continues to provide high curative rates if diagnosed in a localized state. Unfortunately, prostate cancer displays significant heterogeneity within the prostate organ and between individual patients making detection and treatment strategies complex. Although prostate cancer is common among men, the majority will not die from prostate cancer, introducing the issue of overtreatment as a major concern in clinical management of the disease. The focus of the future is to identify those at highest risk for aggressive prostate cancer and to develop prevention and screening strategies, as well as discerning the difference in malignant potential of diagnosed tumors. The Prostate Cancer Research Group of the National Cancer Institute's Early Detection Research Network has contributed to the progress in addressing these concerns. This summary is an overview of the activities of the group.See all articles in this CEBP Focus section, "NCI Early Detection Research Network: Making Cancer Detection Possible."

Impact of H19 Polymorphisms on Prostate Cancer Clinicopathologic Characteristics

Active surveillance is the preferred strategy for very low risk, low risk, and some favorable intermediate risk of prostate cancer. However, the current risk stratifications with initial prostate-specific antigen (iPSA) levels and Gleason scores at biopsy can underestimate the true oncologic threat. More precise predictors are required to avoid the overtreatment of prostate cancer. H19 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have been found to play crucial roles in numerous malignancies, but not yet in prostate cancer. This study assessed the clinicopathologic effects of H19 SNPs on prostate cancer to identify potential active surveillance candidates. A total of 579 patients with prostate cancer who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy between 2012 and 2017 were recruited. The patients were grouped by iPSA levels, and five H19 SNPs were evaluated. Our results show that patients with an iPSA level of ≤7 ng/mL had increased an likelihood of having Gleason score and group grade upgrades after radical prostatectomy compared with patients with an iPSA level of >7 ng/mL. Moreover, patients with loci polymorphisms in either rs3024270 or rs3741219 had a significantly higher risk of perineural invasion (rs3024270: Odds ratio (OR) 2.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30-5.87, p = 0.01; rs3741219: OR 2.30, 95% CI 1.17-4.54, p = 0.018). In conclusion, our results suggested that H19 SNPs play a role in the perineural invasion of prostate cancer.

Prostate Health Index and Prostate Health Index Density as Diagnostic Tools for Improved Prostate Cancer Detection

Background

To evaluate the diagnostic potential of [-2] proPSA (p2PSA), %p2PSA, Prostate Health Index (phi), and phi density (PHID) as independent biomarkers and in composition of multivariable models in predicting high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) and overall and clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa).

Methods

210 males scheduled for prostate biopsy with total PSA (tPSA) range 2-10 ng/mL and normal digital rectal examination were enrolled in the prospective study. Blood samples to measure tPSA, free PSA (fPSA), and p2PSA were collected immediately before 12-core prostate biopsy. Clinically significant PCa definition was based on Epstein's criteria or ISUP grade ≥ 2 at biopsy.

Results

PCa has been diagnosed in 112 (53.3%) patients. Epstein significant and ISUP grade ≥ 2 PCa have been identified in 81 (72.3%) and 40 (35.7%) patients, respectively. Isolated HGPIN at biopsy have been identified in 24 (11.4%) patients. Higher p2PSA and its derivative mean values were associated with PCa. At 90% sensitivity, PHID with cut-off value of 0.54 have demonstrated the highest sensitivity of 35.7% for overall PCa detection, so PHID and phi with cut-off values of 33.2 and 0.63 have demonstrated the specificity of 34.7% and 34.1% for ISUP grade ≥ 2 PCa detection at biopsy, respectively. In univariate ROC analysis, PHID with AUC of 0.77 and 0.80 was the most accurate predictor of overall and Epstein significant PCa, respectively, so phi with AUC of 0.77 was the most accurate predictor of ISUP grade ≥ 2 PCa at biopsy. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, phi improved diagnostic accuracy of multivariable models by 5% in predicting ISUP grade ≥ 2 PCa.

Conclusions

PHID and phi have shown the greatest specificity at 90% sensitivity in predicting overall and clinically significant PCa and would lead to significantly avoid unnecessary biopsies. PHID is the most accurate predictor of overall and Epstein significant PCa, so phi is the most accurate predictor of ISUP grade ≥ 2 PCa. phi significantly improves the diagnostic accuracy of multivariable models in predicting ISUP grade ≥ 2 PCa.