OBJECTIVE: To determine the longitudinal changes of benign prostate-specific antigen (BPSA) and [-2]proPSA and how these changes relate to the outcomes. These markers have been shown to be predictive of prostate cancer (CaP) and benign prostatic hyperplasia treatment; however, little is known about longitudinal changes in these markers. METHODS: In 1990, a 25% subsample from a cohort of white men aged 40-79 years, who were randomly selected from Olmsted County, Minnesota residents, completed a detailed clinical examination. BPSA and [-2]proPSA were measured from frozen sera. The men were evaluated biennially (median follow-up 7 years; range 0-8.8). Mixed-effects regression models were used to estimate the longitudinal changes in the BPSA and [-2]proPSA levels overall and by outcomes. Spearman correlations were used to compare these changes with the baseline levels and the annualized changes in urologic measures. RESULTS: The median and 25th and 75th percentiles annualized percent change for [-2]proPSA and BPSA was 3.7%, 2.5% and 5.2% and 7.3%, 6.8%, and 7.7%, respectively. The annualized percent change for both markers correlated with the baseline and annualized changes in PSA and prostate volume. The annualized percent change increased with increasing age decade for [-2]proPSA but not for BPSA. The rate of increase in [-2]proPSA was significantly greater for men who developed enlarged prostates (median 3.5%, 25th and 75th percentile 2.6% and 4.4%, respectively) or CaP (median 8.1%, 25th and 75th percentile 6.6% and 9.8%, respectively) compared with those who did not develop enlarged prostates (median 1.9%, 25th and 75th percentile 0.9% and 3.0%, respectively) or CaP (median 3.5%, 25th and 75th percentile 2.3% and 4.8%, respectively). CONCLUSION: BPSA and [-2]proPSA levels increase over time. The annualized percent change in [-2]proPSA increases with age and might be a useful predictor of CaP development. Copyright Â
OBJECTIVE: To determine the longitudinal changes of benign prostate-specific antigen (BPSA) and [-2]proPSA and how these changes relate to the outcomes. These markers have been shown to be predictive of prostate cancer (CaP) and benign prostatic hyperplasia treatment; however, little is known about longitudinal changes in these markers. METHODS: In 1990, a 25% subsample from a cohort of white men aged 40-79 years, who were randomly selected from Olmsted County, Minnesota residents, completed a detailed clinical examination. BPSA and [-2]proPSA were measured from frozen sera. The men were evaluated biennially (median follow-up 7 years; range 0-8.8). Mixed-effects regression models were used to estimate the longitudinal changes in the BPSA and [-2]proPSA levels overall and by outcomes. Spearman correlations were used to compare these changes with the baseline levels and the annualized changes in urologic measures. RESULTS: The median and 25th and 75th percentiles annualized percent change for [-2]proPSA and BPSA was 3.7%, 2.5% and 5.2% and 7.3%, 6.8%, and 7.7%, respectively. The annualized percent change for both markers correlated with the baseline and annualized changes in PSA and prostate volume. The annualized percent change increased with increasing age decade for [-2]proPSA but not for BPSA. The rate of increase in [-2]proPSA was significantly greater for men who developed enlarged prostates (median 3.5%, 25th and 75th percentile 2.6% and 4.4%, respectively) or CaP (median 8.1%, 25th and 75th percentile 6.6% and 9.8%, respectively) compared with those who did not develop enlarged prostates (median 1.9%, 25th and 75th percentile 0.9% and 3.0%, respectively) or CaP (median 3.5%, 25th and 75th percentile 2.3% and 4.8%, respectively). CONCLUSION: BPSA and [-2]proPSA levels increase over time. The annualized percent change in [-2]proPSA increases with age and might be a useful predictor of CaP development. Copyright Â
Authors: Brian V Le; Christopher R Griffin; Stacy Loeb; Gustavo F Carvalhal; Donghui Kan; Nikola A Baumann; William J Catalona Journal: J Urol Date: 2010-02-19 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jennifer L St Sauver; Debra J Jacobson; Cynthia J Girman; Michael M Lieber; Michaela E McGree; Steven J Jacobsen Journal: J Urol Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Michael M Lieber; Thomas Rhodes; Debra J Jacobson; Michaela E McGree; Cynthia J Girman; Steven J Jacobsen; Jennifer L St Sauver Journal: BJU Int Date: 2009-07-07 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Danil V Makarov; Sumit Isharwal; Lori J Sokoll; Patricia Landis; Cameron Marlow; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin; H Ballentine Carter; Robert W Veltri Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-11-24 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: E David Crawford; Shandra S Wilson; John D McConnell; Kevin M Slawin; Michael C Lieber; Joseph A Smith; Alan G Meehan; Oliver M Bautista; William R Noble; John W Kusek; Leroy M Nyberg; Claus G Roehrborn Journal: J Urol Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Carsten Stephan; Anna-Maria Kahrs; Henning Cammann; Michael Lein; Mark Schrader; Serdar Deger; Kurt Miller; Klaus Jung Journal: Prostate Date: 2009-02-01 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Jennifer L St Sauver; Debra J Jacobson; Cynthia J Girman; Michaela E McGree; Michael M Lieber; Steven J Jacobsen Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2006-01-20 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Naomi M Gades; Debra J Jacobson; Michaela E McGree; Michael M Lieber; Rosebud O Roberts; Cynthia J Girman; Steven J Jacobsen Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2006-12-14 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Alberto Abrate; Giovanni Lughezzani; Giulio Maria Gadda; Giuliana Lista; Ella Kinzikeeva; Nicola Fossati; Alessandro Larcher; Paolo Dell'Oglio; Francesco Mistretta; Nicolòmaria Buffi; Giorgio Guazzoni; Massimo Lazzeri Journal: Korean J Urol Date: 2014-07-11