PROPOSe: A Real-life Prospective Study of Proclarix, a Novel Blood-based Test to Support Challenging Biopsy Decision-making in Prostate Cancer.

Biomarkers Biopsy Cathepsin D Diagnosis Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging Proclarix Prostate cancer Prostate-specific antigen Thrombospondin-1

Journal

European urology oncology
ISSN: 2588-9311
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol Oncol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101724904

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 2022
Historique:
received: 01 10 2020
revised: 17 11 2020
accepted: 08 12 2020
pubmed: 11 1 2021
medline: 9 6 2022
entrez: 10 1 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based detection of prostate cancer (PCa) often leads to negative biopsy results or detection of clinically insignificant PCa, more frequently in the PSA range of 2-10 ng/ml, in men with increased prostate volume and normal digital rectal examination (DRE). This study evaluated the accuracy of Proclarix, a novel blood-based diagnostic test, to help in biopsy decision-making in this challenging patient population. Ten clinical sites prospectively enrolled 457 men presenting for prostate biopsy with PSA between 2 and 10 ng/ml, normal DRE, and prostate volume ≥35 cm Serum samples were tested blindly at the end of the study. Diagnostic performance of Proclarix risk score was established in correlation to systematic biopsy outcome and its performance compared with %free PSA (%fPSA) and the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) risk calculator (RC) as well as Proclarix density compared with PSA density in men undergoing mpMRI. The sensitivity of Proclarix risk score for clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined as grade group (GG) ≥2 was 91% (n = 362), with higher specificity than both %fPSA (22% vs 14%; difference = 8% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.6-14%], p = 0.005) and RC (22% vs 15%; difference = 7% [95% CI, 0.7-12%], p = 0.028). In the subset of men undergoing mpMRI-fusion biopsy (n = 121), the specificity of Proclarix risk score was significantly higher than PSA density (26% vs 8%; difference = 18% [95% CI, 7-28%], p < 0.001), and at equal sensitivity of 97%, Proclarix density had an even higher specificity of 33% [95% CI, 23-43%]. In a routine use setting, Proclarix accurately discriminated csPCa from no or insignificant PCa in the most challenging patients. Proclarix represents a valuable rule-out test in the diagnostic algorithm for PCa, alone or in combination with mpMRI. Proclarix is a novel blood-based test with the potential to accurately rule out clinically significant prostate cancer, and therefore to reduce the number of unneeded biopsies.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based detection of prostate cancer (PCa) often leads to negative biopsy results or detection of clinically insignificant PCa, more frequently in the PSA range of 2-10 ng/ml, in men with increased prostate volume and normal digital rectal examination (DRE).
OBJECTIVE
This study evaluated the accuracy of Proclarix, a novel blood-based diagnostic test, to help in biopsy decision-making in this challenging patient population.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
Ten clinical sites prospectively enrolled 457 men presenting for prostate biopsy with PSA between 2 and 10 ng/ml, normal DRE, and prostate volume ≥35 cm
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Serum samples were tested blindly at the end of the study. Diagnostic performance of Proclarix risk score was established in correlation to systematic biopsy outcome and its performance compared with %free PSA (%fPSA) and the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) risk calculator (RC) as well as Proclarix density compared with PSA density in men undergoing mpMRI.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS
The sensitivity of Proclarix risk score for clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined as grade group (GG) ≥2 was 91% (n = 362), with higher specificity than both %fPSA (22% vs 14%; difference = 8% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.6-14%], p = 0.005) and RC (22% vs 15%; difference = 7% [95% CI, 0.7-12%], p = 0.028). In the subset of men undergoing mpMRI-fusion biopsy (n = 121), the specificity of Proclarix risk score was significantly higher than PSA density (26% vs 8%; difference = 18% [95% CI, 7-28%], p < 0.001), and at equal sensitivity of 97%, Proclarix density had an even higher specificity of 33% [95% CI, 23-43%].
CONCLUSIONS
In a routine use setting, Proclarix accurately discriminated csPCa from no or insignificant PCa in the most challenging patients. Proclarix represents a valuable rule-out test in the diagnostic algorithm for PCa, alone or in combination with mpMRI.
PATIENT SUMMARY
Proclarix is a novel blood-based test with the potential to accurately rule out clinically significant prostate cancer, and therefore to reduce the number of unneeded biopsies.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33422560
pii: S2588-9311(20)30211-X
doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2020.12.003
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Prostate-Specific Antigen EC 3.4.21.77

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

321-327

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Thomas Steuber (T)

Martini-Klinik, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. Electronic address: steuber@uke.de.

Isabel Heidegger (I)

Medical University Innsbruck, Department of Urology, Innsbruck, Austria.

Mona Kafka (M)

Medical University Innsbruck, Department of Urology, Innsbruck, Austria.

Martin A Roeder (MA)

Copenhagen Prostate Cancer Centre, Department of Urology, Rigshospitalet Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Felix Chun (F)

University Hospital Frankfurt, Department of Urology, Frankfurt, Germany.

Felix Preisser (F)

University Hospital Frankfurt, Department of Urology, Frankfurt, Germany.

Rein-Jüri Palisaar (RJ)

Department of Urology, Marien Hospital Herne, Ruhr-University Bochum, Herne, Germany.

Julian Hanske (J)

Department of Urology, Marien Hospital Herne, Ruhr-University Bochum, Herne, Germany.

Lars Budaeus (L)

Martini-Klinik, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

Ralph Schiess (R)

Proteomedix AG, Zurich-Schlieren, Switzerland.

Thomas Keller (T)

ACOMED statistik, Leipzig, Germany.

Axel Semjonow (A)

University Hospital Muenster, Dept. of Urology, Prostate Centre, Muenster, Germany.

Peter Hammerer (P)

Academic Hospital Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany.

Lukas Manka (L)

Academic Hospital Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany.

Thorsten Ecke (T)

Helios Hospital Bad Saarow, Bad Saarow, Germany.

Christian Schwentner (C)

Diakonie-Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.

Carsten Ohlmann (C)

Johanniter Krankenhaus Bonn, Department of Urology, Bonn, Germany.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH