Eric A Klein1, Arnon Chait2, Jason M Hafron3, Kenneth M Kernen3, Kannan Manickam4, Andrew J Stephenson5, Mathew Wagner6, Hui Zhu7, Aimee Kestranek2, Boris Zaslavsky2, Mark Stovsky8. 1. Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. Electronic address: kleine@ccf.org. 2. Cleveland Diagnostics, Cleveland, OH, USA. 3. Pathology and Research Department, Michigan Institute of Urology, St Clair Shores, MI, USA. 4. Chesapeake Urology Associates, Baltimore, MD, USA. 5. Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 6. Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Clackamas, OR, USA. 7. Louis Stokes VA Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA. 8. Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA; Cleveland Diagnostics, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: IsoPSA is a serum-based assay that predicts prostate cancer (PCa) risk by partitioning isoforms of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) with an aqueous two-phase reagent. OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of IsoPSA in identifying the presence or absence of PCa and the presence of high-grade disease in a contemporary biopsy cohort. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter prospective study of 261 men scheduled for prostate biopsy at five academic and community centers in the USA enrolled between August 2015 and December 2016. INTERVENTION: Performance of the IsoPSA assay. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Discrimination power was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. The outcome of the IsoPSA assay was transformed into risk probability using logistic regression. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to compare the net benefit of IsoPSA against other clinical protocols. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The overall prevalence was 53% for any PCa and 34% for high-grade PCa. The area under the ROC curve was 0.79 for any cancer versus none and 0.81 for high-grade PCa versus low-grade PCa/benign histology. In this preliminary study, DCA revealed a superior net benefit of IsoPSA against no biopsy, all biopsy, and the modified Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator 2.0. At a cutoff selected to recommend biopsy, IsoPSA demonstrated a 48% reduction in false-positive biopsies; at a cutoff selected to identity men at low risk of high-grade disease, there was a 45% reduction in the false-positive rate. CONCLUSION: The structure-based IsoPSA assay outperformed concentration-based PSA measurement, and provided a net benefit against other protocols. Once validated, clinical use of IsoPSA could significantly reduce unnecessary biopsies while identifying patients needing treatment. PATIENT SUMMARY: The IsoPSA assay outperformed prostate-specific antigen in predicting the overall risk of prostate cancer and the risk of clinically significant cancer in a preliminary study. The IsoPSA assay could assist in determining the need for prostate biopsy for patients.
BACKGROUND: IsoPSA is a serum-based assay that predicts prostate cancer (PCa) risk by partitioning isoforms of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) with an aqueous two-phase reagent. OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of IsoPSA in identifying the presence or absence of PCa and the presence of high-grade disease in a contemporary biopsy cohort. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter prospective study of 261 men scheduled for prostate biopsy at five academic and community centers in the USA enrolled between August 2015 and December 2016. INTERVENTION: Performance of the IsoPSA assay. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Discrimination power was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. The outcome of the IsoPSA assay was transformed into risk probability using logistic regression. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to compare the net benefit of IsoPSA against other clinical protocols. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The overall prevalence was 53% for any PCa and 34% for high-grade PCa. The area under the ROC curve was 0.79 for any cancer versus none and 0.81 for high-grade PCa versus low-grade PCa/benign histology. In this preliminary study, DCA revealed a superior net benefit of IsoPSA against no biopsy, all biopsy, and the modified Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator 2.0. At a cutoff selected to recommend biopsy, IsoPSA demonstrated a 48% reduction in false-positive biopsies; at a cutoff selected to identity men at low risk of high-grade disease, there was a 45% reduction in the false-positive rate. CONCLUSION: The structure-based IsoPSA assay outperformed concentration-based PSA measurement, and provided a net benefit against other protocols. Once validated, clinical use of IsoPSA could significantly reduce unnecessary biopsies while identifying patients needing treatment. PATIENT SUMMARY: The IsoPSA assay outperformed prostate-specific antigen in predicting the overall risk of prostate cancer and the risk of clinically significant cancer in a preliminary study. The IsoPSA assay could assist in determining the need for prostate biopsy for patients.
Authors: Maria J Arcila-Ruiz; Dean G Assimos; Benjamin M Brucker; Michael B Chancellor; Sasha C Druskin; J Curtis Nickel; Alan W Partin; Ellen Shapiro Journal: Rev Urol Date: 2017
Authors: Matheus M Pereira; João D Calixto; Ana C A Sousa; Bruno J Pereira; Álvaro S Lima; João A P Coutinho; Mara G Freire Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-09-10 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Nuno R da Silva; Luisa A Ferreira; Pedro P Madeira; José A Teixeira; Vladimir N Uversky; Boris Y Zaslavsky Journal: Polymers (Basel) Date: 2020-06-29 Impact factor: 4.329
Authors: Evan Kovac; Sigrid V Carlsson; Hans Lilja; Jonas Hugosson; Michael W Kattan; Erik Holmberg; Andrew J Stephenson Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-01-03