Potential diagnostic value of multiple indicators combined with total prostate-specific antigen in prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the diagnostic value of different laboratory indicators in combination with total prostate-specific antigen (TPSA) for prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we selected 291 patients who underwent prostate biopsy. Patients were divided into the benign prostatic hyperplasia group and the PCa group. In both groups, patients were again divided into a group with TPSA 4.0-10.0 ng/mL and a group with TPSA >10.0 ng/mL. Clinical data including age, pre-puncture TPSA, free prostate-specific antigen (FPSA), and prostate volume (PV) were collected from all patients. We calculated the metrics PSA/PV (prostate-specific antigen density, PSAD), age/PV (AVR), age × PV/TPSA (PSA-AV), and (FPSA/TPSA)/PSAD [(F/T)/PSAD]). We plotted receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and calculated the area under the ROC curve (AUC).

RESULTS

We found statistically significant differences in PV, PSAD, AVR, PSA-AV, and (F/T) PSAD for patients with TPSA 4.0-10.0 ng/mL and TPSA >10 ng/mL. We further plotted the ROC of individual or combined indices in different subgroups and calculated the AUC. We found that the diagnostic efficacy of the combined indices was higher with TPSA >10 ng/mL.

CONCLUSION

The combination of TPSA with multiple indicators may improve diagnostic accuracy for PCa.

Clinical application of free/total PSA ratio in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in men over 50 years of age with total PSA levels of 2.0-25.0 ng ml-1 in Western China

The goal of this study was to investigate the clinical application of free/total prostate-specific antigen (F/T PSA) ratio, considering the new broad serum total PSA (T-PSA) “gray zone” of 2.0–25.0 ng ml⁻¹ in differential diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) and benign prostate diseases (BPD) in men over 50 years in Western China. A total of 1655 patients were included, 528 with PCa and 1127 with BPD. Serum T-PSA, free PSA (F-PSA), and F/T PSA ratio were analyzed. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess the efficiency of PSA and F/T PSA ratio. There were 47.4% of cancer patients with T-PSA of 2.0–25.0 ng ml⁻¹. When T-PSA was 2.0–4.0 ng ml⁻¹, 4.0–10.0 ng ml⁻¹, and 10.0–25.0 ng ml⁻¹, the area under the curve (AUC) of F/T PSA ratio was 0.749, 0.769, and 0.761, respectively. The best AUC of F/T PSA ratio was 0.811 when T-PSA was 2.0–25.0 ng ml⁻¹, with a specificity of 0.732, a sensitivity of 0.788, and an optimal cutoff value of 15.5%. The AUC of F/T PSA ratio in different age groups (50–59 years, 60–69 years, 70–79 years, and ≥80 years) was 0.767, 0.806, 0.815, and 0.833, respectively, and the best sensitivity (0.857) and specificity (0.802) were observed in patients over 80 years. The T-PSA trend was in accordance with the Gleason score, tumor node metastasis (TNM) stage, and American Joint Committee on Cancer prognosis group. Therefore, the F/T PSA ratio can facilitate the differential diagnosis of PCa and BPD in the broad T-PSA “gray zone”. Serum T-PSA can be a Gleason score and prognostic indicator.

The Value of Prostate-Specific Antigen-Related Indexes and Imaging Screening in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer

Objective

The aim of this study was to explore the value of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, the ratio of free PSA to total PSA (fPSA/TPSA), the PSA density (PSAD), digital rectal examination (DRE), transrectal prostate ultrasound (TRUS), and multiparameter MRI (MP-MRI) in the differential diagnosis of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate cancer (PCa).

Methods

From February 2016 to September 2019, data from 620 patients who underwent systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (STURS-PB) in our hospital were retrospectively collected, including the PSA levels, the fPSA/TPSA ratio, the PSAD, DRE, TRUS, MP-MRI, prostate volume, and other clinical data.

Results

Among the 620 patients, 249 patients were in the PCa group, and 371 patients in the BPH group. The positive puncture rate was 40.16%. The positive predictive values of DRE, TRUS, mpMRI, and TPSA levels for PCa were 39.91%, 39.38%, 64.14%, and 41.57%, respectively; the sensitivity of these parameters was 37.35%, 51.41%, 74.69%, and 57.43%, respectively; and the specificity of these parameters was 62.26%, 46.90%, 71.97%, and 45.82%, respectively. When the TPSA concentration was in the range of 4-20 ng/mL, the positive puncture rate of STURS-PB was 23.18%, with a high rate of misdiagnosis. When the TPSA concentration was in the range of 4-20 ng/mL, the fPSA/TPSA ratio was 0.15, the PSAD was 0.16, the comprehensive evaluation of PCa was optimal (the sensitivity of these parameters was 88.85% and 84.09%, respectively; the specificity was 80.17% and 67.29%, respectively; the positive predictive value was 57.41% and 51.39%, respectively). When the TPSA concentration >4 ng/mL, the fPSA/TPSA ratio ≤0.15 and the PSAD ≥0.16, the sensitivity, specificity, and correctness index of the PCa and BPH diagnosis were 80.54%, 82.75%, and 67.07%, respectively.

Conclusion

When using DRE, TRUS, and MP-MRI to screen for PCa, MP-MRI has a relatively high sensitivity and specificity. Using these three thresholds (TPSA >4 ng/mL combined with an fPSA/TPSA ratio ≤0.15 and a PSAD ≥0.16) is significantly better than using TPSA levels alone for the differential diagnosis of PCa and BPH.