Comparison of Proclarix, PSA Density and MRI-ERSPC Risk Calculator to Select Patients for Prostate Biopsy after mpMRI

Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Clinical, and Biopsy Findings in Suspected Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Multiple strategies integrating magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and clinical data have been proposed to determine the need for a prostate biopsy in men with suspected clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) (Gleason score ≥3 + 4). However, inconsistencies across different strategies create challenges for drawing a definitive conclusion.

Objective

To determine the optimal prostate biopsy decision-making strategy for avoiding unnecessary biopsies and minimizing the risk of missing csPCa by combining MRI Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System (PI-RADS) and clinical data.

Data Sources

PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from inception to July 1, 2022.

Study Selection

English-language studies that evaluated men with suspected but not confirmed csPCa who underwent MRI PI-RADS followed by prostate biopsy were included. Each study had proposed a biopsy plan by combining PI-RADS and clinical data.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Studies were independently assessed for eligibility for inclusion. Quality of studies was appraised using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Mixed-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression models with multimodel inference were performed. Reporting of this study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Independent risk factors of csPCa were determined by performing meta-regression between the rate of csPCa and PI-RADS and clinical parameters. Yields of different biopsy strategies were assessed by performing diagnostic meta-analysis.

Results

The analyses included 72 studies comprising 36 366 patients. Univariable meta-regression showed that PI-RADS 4 (β-coefficient [SE], 7.82 [3.85]; P = .045) and PI-RADS 5 (β-coefficient [SE], 23.18 [4.46]; P < .001) lesions, but not PI-RADS 3 lesions (β-coefficient [SE], -4.08 [3.06]; P = .19), were significantly associated with a higher risk of csPCa. When considered jointly in a multivariable model, prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) was the only clinical variable significantly associated with csPCa (β-coefficient [SE], 15.50 [5.14]; P < .001) besides PI-RADS 5 (β-coefficient [SE], 9.19 [3.33]; P < .001). Avoiding biopsy in patients with lesions with PI-RADS category of 3 or less and PSAD less than 0.10 (vs <0.15) ng/mL2 resulted in reducing 30% (vs 48%) of unnecessary biopsies (compared with performing biopsy in all suspected patients), with an estimated sensitivity of 97% (vs 95%) and number needed to harm of 17 (vs 15).

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that in patients with suspected csPCa, patient-tailored prostate biopsy decisions based on PI-RADS and PSAD could prevent unnecessary procedures while maintaining high sensitivity.

Evaluation of Proclarix in the diagnostic work-up of prostate cancer

Objectives

The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has been widely adopted in the diagnostic work-up for suspicious prostate cancer (PCa) and is recommended in most current guidelines. However, mpMRI lesions are often indeterminate and/or turn out to be false-positive on prostate biopsy. The aim of this work was to evaluate Proclarix, a biomarker test for the detection of relevant PCa, regarding its diagnostic value in all men before biopsy and in men with indeterminate lesions on mpMRI (PI-RADS 3) during work-up for PCa.

Materials and Methods

Men undergoing mpMRI-targeted and systematic biopsy of the prostate were prospectively enrolled. The Proclarix test was evaluated for the detection accuracy of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined as Grade Group ≥ 2 and its association to mpMRI results. Further, Proclarix's performance was also tested when adapted to prostate volume (Proclarix density) and performance compared to PSA density (PSAD).

Results

A total of 150 men with a median age of 65 years and median PSA of 5.8 ng/mL were included in this study. CsPCa was diagnosed in 65 (43%) men. Proclarix was significantly associated with csPCa and higher PI-RADS score (p < 0.001). At the pre-defined cut-off of 10%, Proclarix's sensitivity for csPCa was 94%, specificity 19%, negative predictive value 80% and positive predictive value 47%. Proclarix density showed the highest AUC for the detection of csPCa of 0.77 (95%CI: 0.69-0.85) compared to PSA, PSAD and Proclarix alone. Proclarix was able to identify all six csPCa in men with PI-RADS 3 lesions (n = 28), whereas PSAD missed two out of six. At optimized cut-offs, Proclarix density outperformed PSAD by potentially avoiding 41% of unnecessary biopsies.

Conclusion

Proclarix demonstrates high sensitivity in detecting csPCa but may still result in unnecessary biopsies. However, Proclarix density was able to outperform PSAD and Proclarix and was found to be useful in men with PI-RADS 3 findings by safely avoiding unnecessary biopsies without missing csPCa.

The Potential of Extracellular Matrix- and Integrin Adhesion Complex-Related Molecules for Prostate Cancer Biomarker Discovery

Prostate cancer is among the top five cancer types according to incidence and mortality. One of the main obstacles in prostate cancer management is the inability to foresee its course, which ranges from slow growth throughout years that requires minimum or no intervention to highly aggressive disease that spreads quickly and resists treatment. Therefore, it is not surprising that numerous studies have attempted to find biomarkers of prostate cancer occurrence, risk stratification, therapy response, and patient outcome. However, only a few prostate cancer biomarkers are used in clinics, which shows how difficult it is to find a novel biomarker. Cell adhesion to the extracellular matrix (ECM) through integrins is among the essential processes that govern its fate. Upon activation and ligation, integrins form multi-protein intracellular structures called integrin adhesion complexes (IACs). In this review article, the focus is put on the biomarker potential of the ECM- and IAC-related molecules stemming from both body fluids and prostate cancer tissue. The processes that they are involved in, such as tumor stiffening, bone turnover, and communication via exosomes, and their biomarker potential are also reviewed.