BACKGROUND: ProPSA has been suggested for the detection of preferentially aggressive prostate cancer (PCa). We report on the use of proPSA and free PSA to enhance preoperative staging and grading. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Serum samples from 376 PCa patients within the PSA range 1-25 microg/l who underwent radical prostatectomy were analysed for PSA, free PSA (fPSA) and (-5, -7) proPSA. RESULTS: ProPSA was only significantly different between pT2 and pT3 PCa (p = 0.02) in the subgroup of patients with % fPSA < 10%. The ratio proPSA/% fPSA differed between G2 and G3 (p = 0.004), Gleason < 7 and Gleason > or =7 (p = 0.001), and pT2 and pT3 tumors (p < 0.0001) at PSA 1-25 microg/l. However, % fPSA improved differentiation only between Gleason < 7 and Gleason > or = 7 tumors, not between pT2 and pT3 or G2 and G3 tumors. CONCLUSION: ProPSA as a single parameter did not improve the detection of non-organ confined or aggressive PCa whereas proPSA/% fPSA further improved staging and grading within all analysed PSA ranges.
BACKGROUND: ProPSA has been suggested for the detection of preferentially aggressive prostate cancer (PCa). We report on the use of proPSA and free PSA to enhance preoperative staging and grading. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Serum samples from 376 PCa patients within the PSA range 1-25 microg/l who underwent radical prostatectomy were analysed for PSA, free PSA (fPSA) and (-5, -7) proPSA. RESULTS: ProPSA was only significantly different between pT2 and pT3 PCa (p = 0.02) in the subgroup of patients with % fPSA < 10%. The ratio proPSA/% fPSA differed between G2 and G3 (p = 0.004), Gleason < 7 and Gleason > or =7 (p = 0.001), and pT2 and pT3tumors (p < 0.0001) at PSA 1-25 microg/l. However, % fPSA improved differentiation only between Gleason < 7 and Gleason > or = 7 tumors, not between pT2 and pT3 or G2 and G3 tumors. CONCLUSION: ProPSA as a single parameter did not improve the detection of non-organ confined or aggressive PCa whereas proPSA/% fPSA further improved staging and grading within all analysed PSA ranges.
Authors: Lori J Sokoll; Martin G Sanda; Ziding Feng; Jacob Kagan; Isaac A Mizrahi; Dennis L Broyles; Alan W Partin; Sudhir Srivastava; Ian M Thompson; John T Wei; Zhen Zhang; Daniel W Chan Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Montserrat Ferrer-Batallé; Esther Llop; Manel Ramírez; Rosa Núria Aleixandre; Marc Saez; Josep Comet; Rafael de Llorens; Rosa Peracaula Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2017-04-17 Impact factor: 5.923