Clinical utility of a serum biomarker panel in distinguishing prostate cancer from benign prostate hyperplasia.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 07 2021
23 07 2021
Historique:
received:
11
03
2021
accepted:
06
07
2021
entrez:
24
7
2021
pubmed:
25
7
2021
medline:
28
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer (PCa) is limited by the lack of specificity but is further complicated in the benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) population which also exhibit elevated PSA, representing a clear unmet need to distinguish BPH from PCa. Herein, we evaluated the utility of FLNA IP-MRM, age, and prostate volume to stratify men with BPH from those with PCa. Diagnostic performance of the biomarker panel was better than PSA alone in discriminating patients with negative biopsy from those with PCa, as well as those who have had multiple prior biopsies (AUC 0.75 and 0.87 compared to AUC of PSA alone 0.55 and 0.57 for patients who have had single compared to multiple negative biopsies, respectively). Of interest, in patients with PCa, the panel demonstrated improved performance than PSA alone in those with Gleason scores of 5-7 (AUC 0.76 vs. 0.56) and Gleason scores of 8-10 (AUC 0.74 vs. 0.47). With Gleason scores (8-10), the negative predictive value of the panel is 0.97, indicating potential to limit false negatives in aggressive cancers. Together, these data demonstrate the ability of the biomarker panel to perform better than PSA alone in men with BPH, thus preventing unnecessary biopsies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34302010
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-94438-4
pii: 10.1038/s41598-021-94438-4
pmc: PMC8302659
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
Prostate-Specific Antigen
EC 3.4.21.77
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
15052Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Cancer Causes Control. 2008 Mar;19(2):175-81
pubmed: 18027095
Aust Fam Physician. 2015 Apr;44(4):225-30
pubmed: 25901408
BJU Int. 2015 Jun;115(6):913-20
pubmed: 24589357
Eur Urol. 2011 Aug;60(2):214-22
pubmed: 21482022
J Urol. 2014 Jun;191(6):1737-42
pubmed: 24342148
Int J Urol. 2015 Jun;22(6):524-32
pubmed: 25847604
Ann Intern Med. 2012 Jul 17;157(2):120-34
pubmed: 22801674
Clin Chim Acta. 2014 Sep 25;436:256-62
pubmed: 24952364
Eur Urol. 2013 Jun;63(6):986-94
pubmed: 23375961
Rev Urol. 2015;17(1):3-13
pubmed: 26028995
Eur Urol. 2010 Jun;57(6):921-7
pubmed: 20189711
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Dec;16(16):1667-76
pubmed: 26563502
Rev Urol. 2004;6 Suppl 1:S8-S15
pubmed: 16985855
N Engl J Med. 2004 May 27;350(22):2239-46
pubmed: 15163773
J Urol. 2015 Dec;194(6):1587-93
pubmed: 26087383
Cancer. 2014 Jan 1;120(1):96-102
pubmed: 24122801
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Aug 20;30(24):3020-5
pubmed: 22802323
Med Decis Making. 2008 May-Jun;28(3):323-31
pubmed: 18319508
J Mol Biomark Diagn. 2017;8(2):
pubmed: 29682400
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2014 Sep;52(9):1347-55
pubmed: 24695041
Endocr Relat Cancer. 2012 Nov 09;19(6):759-77
pubmed: 22993077
Int J Oncol. 2014 Feb;44(2):467-72
pubmed: 24297527