Literature DB >> 20619529

External validation of urinary PCA3-based nomograms to individually predict prostate biopsy outcome.

Marco Auprich1, Alexander Haese, Jochen Walz, Karl Pummer, Alexandre de la Taille, Markus Graefen, Theo de Reijke, Margit Fisch, Paul Kil, Paolo Gontero, Jacques Irani, Felix K-H Chun.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prior to safely adopting risk stratification tools, their performance must be tested in an external patient cohort.
OBJECTIVE: To assess accuracy and generalizability of previously reported, internally validated, prebiopsy prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) gene-based nomograms when applied to a large, external, European cohort of men at risk of prostate cancer (PCa). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Biopsy data, including urinary PCA3 score, were available for 621 men at risk of PCa who were participating in a European multi-institutional study. INTERVENTION: All patients underwent a ≥10-core prostate biopsy. Biopsy indication was based on suspicious digital rectal examination, persistently elevated prostate-specific antigen level (2.5-10 ng/ml) and/or suspicious histology (atypical small acinar proliferation of the prostate, >/= two cores affected by high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in first set of biopsies). MEASUREMENTS: PCA3 scores were assessed using the Progensa assay (Gen-Probe Inc, San Diego, CA, USA). According to the previously reported nomograms, different PCA3 score codings were used. The probability of a positive biopsy was calculated using previously published logistic regression coefficients. Predicted outcomes were compared to the actual biopsy results. Accuracy was calculated using the area under the curve as a measure of discrimination; calibration was explored graphically. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Biopsy-confirmed PCa was detected in 255 (41.1%) men. Median PCA3 score of biopsy-negative versus biopsy-positive men was 20 versus 48 in the total cohort, 17 versus 47 at initial biopsy, and 37 versus 53 at repeat biopsy (all p≤0.002). External validation of all four previously reported PCA3-based nomograms demonstrated equally high accuracy (0.73-0.75) and excellent calibration. The main limitations of the study reside in its early detection setting, referral scenario, and participation of only tertiary-care centers.
CONCLUSIONS: In accordance with the original publication, previously developed PCA3-based nomograms achieved high accuracy and sufficient calibration. These novel nomograms represent robust tools and are thus generalizable to European men at risk of harboring PCa. Consequently, in presence of a PCA3 score, these nomograms may be safely used to assist clinicians when prostate biopsy is contemplated.
Copyright © 2010 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20619529     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.06.038

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  23 in total

Review 1.  Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: an update.

Authors:  Nathan Lawrentschuk; Laurence Klotz
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 2.  Addressing the need for repeat prostate biopsy: new technology and approaches.

Authors:  Michael L Blute; E Jason Abel; Tracy M Downs; Frederick Kelcz; David F Jarrard
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 14.432

3.  Prostate cancer: diagnostic performance of the PCA3 urine test.

Authors:  George Leighton Lee; Albert Dobi; Shiv Srivastava
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 4.  Diagnostic value of urine prostate cancer antigen 3 test using a cutoff value of 35 μg/L in patients with prostate cancer.

Authors:  Bin Hu; Hongmei Yang; Hongwei Yang
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2014-05-27

Review 5.  Function of PCA3 in prostate tissue and clinical research progress on developing a PCA3 score.

Authors:  Yue Wang; Xiao-Jun Liu; Xu-Dong Yao
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 5.087

6.  High PCA3 scores in urine correlate with poor-prognosis factors in prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Wei Wei; Jiangyong Leng; Hongxiang Shao; Weidong Wang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-09-15

Review 7.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: past, present and future.

Authors:  Eric A Singer; Aradhana Kaushal; Baris Turkbey; Anna Couvillon; Peter A Pinto; Howard L Parnes
Journal:  Curr Opin Oncol       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.645

8.  Regulators of gene expression as biomarkers for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Stacey S Willard; Shahriar Koochekpour
Journal:  Am J Cancer Res       Date:  2012-11-20       Impact factor: 6.166

9.  Assessment of long-term outcomes associated with urinary prostate cancer antigen 3 and TMPRSS2:ERG gene fusion at repeat biopsy.

Authors:  Selin Merdan; Scott A Tomlins; Christine L Barnett; Todd M Morgan; James E Montie; John T Wei; Brian T Denton
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2015-08-17       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Assays for prostate cancer : changing the screening paradigm?

Authors:  Jens Hansen; Michael Rink; Markus Graefen; Shahrokh Shariat; Felix K-H Chun
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.074

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.