PURPOSE: Due to the limited specificity of prostate specific antigen for prostate cancer screening, there is an ongoing search for adjunctive biomarkers. Retrospective studies have suggested that an isoform of proenzyme prostate specific antigen called [-2]proenzyme prostate specific antigen may enhance the specificity of prostate specific antigen based screening. We examined the usefulness of this isoform in a prospective prostate cancer screening study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From a population of 2,034 men undergoing prostate cancer screening we examined the relationship between the measurement of the [-2]isoform of proenzyme prostate specific antigen (p2PSA) and prostate cancer detection. Specifically we compared the usefulness of total prostate specific antigen, the ratio of free-to-total prostate specific antigen, the ratio of p2PSA-to-free prostate specific antigen, and a formula combining prostate specific antigen, free prostate specific antigen and p2PSA (the Beckman Coulter prostate health index or phi) to predict prostate cancer in men from the study undergoing prostate biopsy with a prostate specific antigen of 2.5 to 10 ng/ml and nonsuspicious digital rectal examination. RESULTS: Despite similar total prostate specific antigen (p = 0.88), percent free prostate specific antigen (p = 0.02) and %p2PSA (p = 0.0006) distinguished between positive and negative biopsy results. On ROC analysis %p2PSA (AUC 0.76) outperformed prostate specific antigen (AUC 0.50) and percent free prostate specific antigen (AUC 0.68) for differentiating between prostate cancer and benign disease. Setting the sensitivity at 88.5%, p2PSA led to a substantial improvement in specificity as well as positive and negative predictive values. The Beckman Coulter prostate health index (AUC 0.77) had the best overall performance characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first prospective study to our knowledge to demonstrate that p2PSA provides improved discrimination between prostate cancer and benign disease in screened men with a prostate specific antigen of 2.5 to 10 ng/ml and a negative digital rectal examination. Copyright (c) 2010 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PURPOSE: Due to the limited specificity of prostate specific antigen for prostate cancer screening, there is an ongoing search for adjunctive biomarkers. Retrospective studies have suggested that an isoform of proenzyme prostate specific antigen called [-2]proenzyme prostate specific antigen may enhance the specificity of prostate specific antigen based screening. We examined the usefulness of this isoform in a prospective prostate cancer screening study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From a population of 2,034 men undergoing prostate cancer screening we examined the relationship between the measurement of the [-2]isoform of proenzyme prostate specific antigen (p2PSA) and prostate cancer detection. Specifically we compared the usefulness of total prostate specific antigen, the ratio of free-to-total prostate specific antigen, the ratio of p2PSA-to-free prostate specific antigen, and a formula combining prostate specific antigen, free prostate specific antigen and p2PSA (the Beckman Coulter prostate health index or phi) to predict prostate cancer in men from the study undergoing prostate biopsy with a prostate specific antigen of 2.5 to 10 ng/ml and nonsuspicious digital rectal examination. RESULTS: Despite similar total prostate specific antigen (p = 0.88), percent free prostate specific antigen (p = 0.02) and %p2PSA (p = 0.0006) distinguished between positive and negative biopsy results. On ROC analysis %p2PSA (AUC 0.76) outperformed prostate specific antigen (AUC 0.50) and percent free prostate specific antigen (AUC 0.68) for differentiating between prostate cancer and benign disease. Setting the sensitivity at 88.5%, p2PSA led to a substantial improvement in specificity as well as positive and negative predictive values. The Beckman Coulter prostate health index (AUC 0.77) had the best overall performance characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first prospective study to our knowledge to demonstrate that p2PSA provides improved discrimination between prostate cancer and benign disease in screened men with a prostate specific antigen of 2.5 to 10 ng/ml and a negative digital rectal examination. Copyright (c) 2010 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Athanase Billis; Marbele S Guimaraes; Leandro L L Freitas; Luciana Meirelles; Luis A Magna; Ubirajara Ferreira Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-06-11 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Masood A Khan; Lori J Sokoll; Daniel W Chan; Leslie A Mangold; Phaedre Mohr; Stephen D Mikolajczyk; Harry J Linton; Cindy L Evans; Harry G Rittenhouse; Alan W Partin Journal: Urology Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: W J Catalona; A W Partin; K M Slawin; M K Brawer; R C Flanigan; A Patel; J P Richie; J B deKernion; P C Walsh; P T Scardino; P H Lange; E N Subong; R E Parson; G H Gasior; K G Loveland; P C Southwick Journal: JAMA Date: 1998-05-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: S D Mikolajczyk; L S Grauer; L S Millar; T M Hill; A Kumar; H G Rittenhouse; R L Wolfert; M S Saedi Journal: Urology Date: 1997-11 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Stijn H de Vries; René Raaijmakers; Bert G Blijenberg; Stephan D Mikolajczyk; Harry G Rittenhouse; F H Schröder Journal: Urology Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Yoshio Naya; Herbert A Fritsche; Viju A Bhadkamkar; Stephen D Mikolajczyk; Harry G Rittenhouse; Richard Joseph Babaian Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2005 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: W J Catalona; D S Smith; T L Ratliff; K M Dodds; D E Coplen; J J Yuan; J A Petros; G L Andriole Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1991-04-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Thomas Rhodes; Debra J Jacobson; Michaela E McGree; Jennifer L St Sauver; Cynthia J Girman; Michael M Lieber; George G Klee; Kitaw Demissie; Steven J Jacobsen Journal: Urology Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Brian T Helfand; Stacy Loeb; Qiaoyan Hu; Phillip R Cooper; Kimberly A Roehl; Barry B McGuire; Nikola A Baumann; William J Catalona Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-02-27 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jeffrey J Tosoian; Stacy Loeb; Zhaoyong Feng; Sumit Isharwal; Patricia Landis; Debra J Elliot; Robert Veltri; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin; H Ballentine Carter; Bruce Trock; Lori J Sokoll Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-08-15 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Sigrid V Carlsson; Mari T Peltola; Daniel Sjoberg; Fritz H Schröder; Jonas Hugosson; Kim Pettersson; Peter T Scardino; Andrew J Vickers; Hans Lilja; Monique J Roobol Journal: BJU Int Date: 2013-02-28 Impact factor: 5.588