Integration of Urinary EN2 Protein & Cell-Free RNA Data in the Development of a Multivariable Risk Model for the Detection of Prostate Cancer Prior to Biopsy

Applications of Urinary Extracellular Vesicles in the Diagnosis and Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous cancer among men in the UK, causing significant health and economic burdens. Diagnosis and risk prognostication can be challenging due to the genetic and clinical heterogeneity of prostate cancer as well as uncertainties in our knowledge of the underlying biology and natural history of disease development. Urinary extracellular vesicles (EVs) are microscopic, lipid bilayer defined particles released by cells that carry a variety of molecular cargoes including nucleic acids, proteins and other molecules. Urine is a plentiful source of prostate-derived EVs. In this narrative review, we summarise the evidence on the function of urinary EVs and their applications in the evolving field of prostate cancer diagnostics and active surveillance. EVs are implicated in the development of all hallmarks of prostate cancer, and this knowledge has been applied to the development of multiple diagnostic tests, which are largely based on RNA and miRNA. Common gene probes included in multi-probe tests include PCA3 and ERG, and the miRNAs miR-21 and miR-141. The next decade will likely bring further improvements in the diagnostic accuracy of biomarkers as well as insights into molecular biological mechanisms of action that can be translated into opportunities in precision uro-oncology.

Biomarkers for Pre-Treatment Risk Stratification of Prostate Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most frequently occurring malignancies. Although most cases are not life-threatening, approximately 20% endure an unfavorable outcome. PSA-based screening reduced mortality but at the cost of an increased overdiagnosis/overtreatment of low-risk (lrPCa) and favorable intermediate-risk (firPCa) PCa. PCa risk-groups are usually identified based on serum Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA), the Gleason score, and clinical T stage, which have consistent although variable specificity or subjectivity. Thus, more effective and specific tools for risk assessment are needed, ideally making use of minimally invasive methods such as liquid biopsies. In this systematic review we assessed the clinical potential and analytical performance of liquid biopsy-based biomarkers for pre-treatment risk stratification of PCa patients.

METHODS

Studies that assessed PCa pre-treatment risk were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, and MedLine. PCa risk biomarkers were analyzed, and the studies' quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool.

RESULTS

The final analysis comprised 24 full-text articles, in which case-control studies predominated, mostly reporting urine-based biomarkers (54.2%) and biomarker quantification by qPCR (41.7%). Categorization into risk groups was heterogeneous, predominantly making use of the Gleason score.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review unveils the substantial clinical promise of using circulating biomarkers in assessing the risk for prostate cancer patients. However, the standardization of groups, categories, and biomarker validation are mandatory before this technique can be implemented. Circulating biomarkers might represent a viable alternative to currently available tools, obviating the need for tissue biopsies, and allowing for faster and more cost-effective testing, with superior analytical performance, specificity, and reproducibility.

A meta-analysis for the diagnostic accuracy of SelectMDx in prostate cancer

To overview the diagnostic accuracy of SelectMDx for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer and to review sources of methodologic variability. Four electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies investigating the diagnostic value of SelectMDx compared with the gold standard. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. Included studies were assessed according to the Standards for Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. The review identified 14 relevant publications with 2579 patients. All reports constituted phase 1 biomarker studies. Pooled analysis of findings found an area under the receiver operating characteristic analysis curve of 70% [95% CI, 66%-74%], a sensitivity of 81% [95% CI, 69%-89%], and a specificity of 52% [95% CI, 41%-63%]. The positive likelihood ratio was 1.68, and the negative predictive value is 0.37. Factors that may influence variability in test results included the breath collection method, the patient's physiologic condition, the test environment, and the method of analysis. Considerable heterogeneity was observed among the studies owing to the difference in the sample size. SelectMDx appears to have moderate to good diagnostic accuracy in differentiating patients with clinically significant prostate cancer from people at high risk of developing prostate cancer. Higher-quality clinical studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of SelectMDx for clinically significant cancer are still needed.

Liquid Biopsy in Prostate Cancer Management—Current Challenges and Future Perspectives

Simple Summary

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a widespread malignancy, representing the second leading cause of cancer-related death in men. In the last years, liquid biopsy has emerged as an attractive and promising strategy complementary to invasive tissue biopsy to guide PCa diagnosis, follow-up and treatment response. Liquid biopsy is employed to assess several body fluids biomarkers, including circulating tumor cells (CTCs), extracellular vesicles (EVs), circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and RNA (ctRNA). This review dissects recent advancements and future perspectives of liquid biopsy, highlighting its strength and weaknesses in PCa management.

Abstract

Although appreciable attempts in screening and diagnostic approaches have been achieved, prostate cancer (PCa) remains a widespread malignancy, representing the second leading cause of cancer-related death in men. Drugs currently used in PCa therapy initially show a potent anti-tumor effect, but frequently induce resistance and PCa progresses toward metastatic castration-resistant forms (mCRPC), virtually incurable. Liquid biopsy has emerged as an attractive and promising strategy complementary to invasive tissue biopsy to guide PCa diagnosis and treatment. Liquid biopsy shows the ability to represent the tumor microenvironment, allow comprehensive information and follow-up the progression of the tumor, enabling the development of different treatment strategies as well as permitting the monitoring of therapy response. Liquid biopsy, indeed, is endowed with a significant potential to modify PCa management. Several blood biomarkers could be analyzed for diagnostic, prognostic and predictive purposes, including circulating tumor cells (CTCs), extracellular vesicles (EVs), circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and RNA (ctRNA). In addition, several other body fluids may be adopted (i.e., urine, sperm, etc.) beyond blood. This review dissects recent advancements and future perspectives of liquid biopsies, highlighting their strength and weaknesses in PCa management.

A Model to Detect Significant Prostate Cancer Integrating Urinary Peptide and Extracellular Vesicle RNA Data

There is a clinical need to improve assessment of biopsy-naïve patients for the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa). In this study, we investigated whether the robust integration of expression data from urinary extracellular vesicle RNA (EV-RNA) with urine proteomic metabolites can accurately predict PCa biopsy outcome. Urine samples collected within the Movember GAP1 Urine Biomarker study (n = 192) were analysed by both mass spectrometry-based urine-proteomics and NanoString gene-expression analysis (167 gene-probes). Cross-validated LASSO penalised regression and Random Forests identified a combination of clinical and urinary biomarkers for predictive modelling of significant disease (Gleason Score (Gs) ≥ 3 + 4). Four predictive models were developed: ‘MassSpec’ (CE-MS proteomics), ‘EV-RNA’, and ‘SoC’ (standard of care) clinical data models, alongside a fully integrated omics-model, deemed ‘ExoSpec’. ExoSpec (incorporating four gene transcripts, six peptides, and two clinical variables) is the best model for predicting Gs ≥ 3 + 4 at initial biopsy (AUC = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.77−0.88) and is superior to a standard of care (SoC) model utilising clinical data alone (AUC = 0.71, p < 0.001, 1000 resamples). As the ExoSpec Risk Score increases, the likelihood of higher-grade PCa on biopsy is significantly greater (OR = 2.8, 95% CI: 2.1−3.7). The decision curve analyses reveals that ExoSpec provides a net benefit over SoC and could reduce unnecessary biopsies by 30%.