The prostate health index (PHI) density: Are there advantages over PHI or over the prostate-specific antigen density?

Clinically significant prostate cancer Prostate cancer Prostate health index Prostate health index density Prostate-specific antigen density

Journal

Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry
ISSN: 1873-3492
Titre abrégé: Clin Chim Acta
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 1302422

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2021
Historique:
received: 18 05 2021
revised: 01 06 2021
accepted: 02 06 2021
pubmed: 8 6 2021
medline: 21 7 2021
entrez: 7 6 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Overdiagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) should be minimized. We wanted to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the prostate health index density (PHID) and compare it with that of the prostate health index (PHI) alone and of the prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD). 232 men scheduled for a prostate biopsy (prostate-specific antigen level: 2-10 µg/L), were enrolled. PHI, PHID and PSAD were evaluated considering PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) as the outcomes. For PCa, the area under the curve (AUC) was higher for PHID (0.823) than for PHI (0.779) and PSAD (0.776). For csPCa, the AUC was also higher for PHID (0.851) but closer to that of PSAD (0.819) and PHI (0.813). For equal sensitivities (90%) for PCa, PHID and PSAD offered the highest specificities (37%), missing the same number of cancers (n = 11). Considering csPCa, PHI and PHID had similar specificities. PSAD reached the highest specificity (50.0%), sparing 32.8% of biopsies, while missing 9 cases of csPCa. PHID has a better diagnostic performance than PHI for overall PCa detection, but very close to the PSAD performance. Considering csPCa, PHI and PHID perform almost equally, but PSAD has a better diagnostic performance.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND AIMS OBJECTIVE
Overdiagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) should be minimized. We wanted to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the prostate health index density (PHID) and compare it with that of the prostate health index (PHI) alone and of the prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD).
MATERIALS AND METHODS METHODS
232 men scheduled for a prostate biopsy (prostate-specific antigen level: 2-10 µg/L), were enrolled. PHI, PHID and PSAD were evaluated considering PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) as the outcomes.
RESULTS RESULTS
For PCa, the area under the curve (AUC) was higher for PHID (0.823) than for PHI (0.779) and PSAD (0.776). For csPCa, the AUC was also higher for PHID (0.851) but closer to that of PSAD (0.819) and PHI (0.813). For equal sensitivities (90%) for PCa, PHID and PSAD offered the highest specificities (37%), missing the same number of cancers (n = 11). Considering csPCa, PHI and PHID had similar specificities. PSAD reached the highest specificity (50.0%), sparing 32.8% of biopsies, while missing 9 cases of csPCa.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
PHID has a better diagnostic performance than PHI for overall PCa detection, but very close to the PSAD performance. Considering csPCa, PHI and PHID perform almost equally, but PSAD has a better diagnostic performance.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34097882
pii: S0009-8981(21)00204-7
doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2021.06.006
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Prostate-Specific Antigen EC 3.4.21.77

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

133-138

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Manuel M Garrido (MM)

Department of Clinical Pathology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Lisboa Central, Lisbon, Portugal; Department of Laboratory Medicine, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal. Electronic address: manuel.agarrido@chlc.min-saude.pt.

Ruy M Ribeiro (RM)

Biomathematics Laboratory, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.

Luís C Pinheiro (LC)

Department of Urology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Lisboa Central, Lisbon, Portugal; Department of Urology, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas da Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.

Stefan Holdenrieder (S)

Institute of Laboratory Medicine, Munich Biomarker Research Center, Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.

João T Guimarães (JT)

Department of Clinical Pathology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de São João, Porto, Portugal; Department of Biomedicine, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal; EPIUnit, Instituto de Saúde Pública, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.

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