MyProstateScore in men considering repeat biopsy: validation of a simple testing approach.
Journal
Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases
ISSN: 1476-5608
Titre abrégé: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9815755
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2023
09 2023
Historique:
received:
05
06
2022
accepted:
09
12
2022
revised:
16
11
2022
medline:
28
8
2023
pubmed:
31
12
2022
entrez:
30
12
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Men with persistent risk of Grade Group (GG) ≥ 2 cancer after a negative biopsy present a unique clinical challenge. The validated MyProstateScore test is clinically-available for pre-biopsy risk stratification. In biopsy-naïve patients, we recently validated a straightforward testing approach to rule-out GG ≥ 2 cancer with 98% negative predictive value (NPV) and 97% sensitivity. In the current study, we established a practical MPS-based testing approach in men with a previous negative biopsy being considered for repeat biopsy. Patients provided post-digital rectal examination urine prior to repeat biopsy. MyProstateScore was calculated using the validated, locked model including urinary PCA3 and TMPRSS2:ERG scores with serum PSA. In a clinically-appropriate primary (i.e., training) cohort, we identified a lower (rule-out) threshold approximating 90% sensitivity and an upper (rule-in) threshold approximating 80% specificity for GG ≥ 2 cancer. These thresholds were applied to an external validation cohort, and performance measures and clinical outcomes associated with their use were calculated. MyProstateScore thresholds of 15 and 40 met pre-defined performance criteria in the primary cohort (422 patients; median PSA 6.4, IQR 4.3-9.1). In the 268-patient validation cohort, 25 men (9.3%) had GG ≥ 2 cancer on repeat biopsy. The rule-out threshold of 15 provided 100% NPV and sensitivity for GG ≥ 2 cancer and would have prevented 23% of unnecessary biopsies. Use of MyProstateScore >40 to rule-in biopsy would have prevented 67% of biopsies while maintaining 95% NPV. In the validation cohort, the prevalence of GG ≥ 2 cancer was 0% for MyProstateScore 0-15, 6.5% for MyProstateScore 15-40, and 19% for MyProstateScore >40. In patients who previously underwent a negative prostate biopsy, the MyProstateScore values of 15 and 40 yielded clinically-actionable rule-in and rule-out risk groups. Using this straightforward testing approach, MyProstateScore can meaningfully inform patients and physicians weighing the need for repeat biopsy.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Men with persistent risk of Grade Group (GG) ≥ 2 cancer after a negative biopsy present a unique clinical challenge. The validated MyProstateScore test is clinically-available for pre-biopsy risk stratification. In biopsy-naïve patients, we recently validated a straightforward testing approach to rule-out GG ≥ 2 cancer with 98% negative predictive value (NPV) and 97% sensitivity. In the current study, we established a practical MPS-based testing approach in men with a previous negative biopsy being considered for repeat biopsy.
METHODS
Patients provided post-digital rectal examination urine prior to repeat biopsy. MyProstateScore was calculated using the validated, locked model including urinary PCA3 and TMPRSS2:ERG scores with serum PSA. In a clinically-appropriate primary (i.e., training) cohort, we identified a lower (rule-out) threshold approximating 90% sensitivity and an upper (rule-in) threshold approximating 80% specificity for GG ≥ 2 cancer. These thresholds were applied to an external validation cohort, and performance measures and clinical outcomes associated with their use were calculated.
RESULTS
MyProstateScore thresholds of 15 and 40 met pre-defined performance criteria in the primary cohort (422 patients; median PSA 6.4, IQR 4.3-9.1). In the 268-patient validation cohort, 25 men (9.3%) had GG ≥ 2 cancer on repeat biopsy. The rule-out threshold of 15 provided 100% NPV and sensitivity for GG ≥ 2 cancer and would have prevented 23% of unnecessary biopsies. Use of MyProstateScore >40 to rule-in biopsy would have prevented 67% of biopsies while maintaining 95% NPV. In the validation cohort, the prevalence of GG ≥ 2 cancer was 0% for MyProstateScore 0-15, 6.5% for MyProstateScore 15-40, and 19% for MyProstateScore >40.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients who previously underwent a negative prostate biopsy, the MyProstateScore values of 15 and 40 yielded clinically-actionable rule-in and rule-out risk groups. Using this straightforward testing approach, MyProstateScore can meaningfully inform patients and physicians weighing the need for repeat biopsy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36585434
doi: 10.1038/s41391-022-00633-3
pii: 10.1038/s41391-022-00633-3
pmc: PMC10310885
mid: NIHMS1893885
doi:
Substances chimiques
Prostate-Specific Antigen
EC 3.4.21.77
Antigens, Neoplasm
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
563-567Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U2C CA271854
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R35 CA231996
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U01 CA214170
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIGMS NIH HHS
ID : T32 GM007863
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U24 CA086368
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R01 CA236558
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P50 CA186786
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Tan N, Lane BR, Li J, Moussa AS, Soriano M, Jones JS. Prostate cancers diagnosed at repeat biopsy are smaller and less likely to be high grade. J Urol. 2008;180:1325–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.06.022
pubmed: 18707706
ElShafei A, Nyame Y, Kara O, Badawy A, Amujiogu I, Fareed K, et al. More Favorable Pathological Outcomes in Men with Low Risk Prostate Cancer Diagnosed on Repeat versus Initial Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Prostate Biopsy. J Urol. 2016;195:1767–72.
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.079
pubmed: 26724397
Kearns JT, Lin DW. Utilizing Biomarkers in Patients with Prior Negative Prostate Biopsy. In: Chang SS, Cookson MS, editors. Prostate Cancer: Clinical Case Scenarios. Springer; 2018. p. 43–52.
Blute ML Jr, Abel EJ, Downs TM, Kelcz F, Jarrard DF. Addressing the need for repeat prostate biopsy: new technology and approaches. Nat Rev Urol. 2015;12:435–44.
doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2015.159
pubmed: 26171803
Nordstrom T, Adolfsson J, Gronberg H, Eklund M. Repeat Prostate-Specific Antigen Tests Before Prostate Biopsy Decisions. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016;108:435–44.
Tomlins SA, Day JR, Lonigro RJ, Hovelson DH, Siddiqui J, Kunju LP, et al. Urine TMPRSS2:ERG Plus PCA3 for Individualized Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment. Eur Urol. 2016;70:45–53.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.04.039
pubmed: 25985884
Tosoian JJ, Trock BJ, Morgan TM, Salami SS, Tomlins SA, Spratt DE, et al. Use of the MyProstateScore Test to Rule Out Clinically Significant Cancer: Validation of a Straightforward Clinical Testing Approach. J Urol. 2021;205:732–9.
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001430
pubmed: 33080150
Eyrich NW, Wei JT, Niknafs YS, Siddiqui J, Ellimoottil C, Salami SS, et al. Association of MyProstateScore (MPS) with prostate cancer grade in the radical prostatectomy specimen. Urol Oncol. 2022;40:4.e1–7.
doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.09.007
pubmed: 34753659
Merdan S, Tomlins SA, Barnett CL, Morgan TM, Montie JE, Wei JT, et al. Assessment of long-term outcomes associated with urinary prostate cancer antigen 3 and TMPRSS2:ERG gene fusion at repeat biopsy. Cancer. 2015;121:4071–9.
doi: 10.1002/cncr.29611
pubmed: 26280815
Eyrich NW, Morgan TM, Tosoian JJ. Biomarkers for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: contemporary clinical data and future directions. Transl Androl Urol. 2021;10:3091–103.
doi: 10.21037/tau-20-1151
pubmed: 34430413
pmcid: 8350244
Assel M, Sjoberg D, Elders A, Wang X, Huo D, Botchway A, et al. Guidelines for Reporting of Statistics for Clinical Research in Urology. Eur Urol. 2019;75:358–67.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.12.014
pubmed: 30580902
Ferraro S, Bussetti M, Bassani N, Rossi RS, Incarbone GP, Bianchi F, et al. Definition of Outcome-Based Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Thresholds for Advanced Prostate Cancer Risk Prediction. Cancers. 2021;13:3381.
Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR, Dall’Era MA, Davies BJ, Davis JW, Eggener SE, et al. The State of the Science on Prostate Cancer Biomarkers: The San Francisco Consensus Statement. Eur Urol. 2019;76:268–72.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.05.013
pubmed: 31128968
Wei JT, Feng Z, Partin AW, Brown E, Thompson I, Sokoll L, et al. Can urinary PCA3 supplement PSA in the early detection of prostate cancer? J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:4066–72.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.52.8505
pubmed: 25385735
pmcid: 4265117
Williams BA, Mandrekar JN, Mandrekar SJ, Cha SS, Furth AF. Finding Optimal Cutpoints for Continuous Covariates with Binary and Time-to-Event Outcomes. Tech Rep Ser. 2006;79:1–27.
Vickers AJ, Van Calster B, Steyerberg EW. Net benefit approaches to the evaluation of prediction models, molecular markers, and diagnostic tests. BMJ. 2016;352:i6.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.i6
pubmed: 26810254
pmcid: 4724785
McKiernan J, Noerholm M, Tadigotla V, Kumar S, Torkler P, Sant G, et al. A urine-based Exosomal gene expression test stratifies risk of high-grade prostate Cancer in men with prior negative prostate biopsy undergoing repeat biopsy. BMC Urol. 2020;20:138.
doi: 10.1186/s12894-020-00712-4
pubmed: 32873277
pmcid: 7466797
Ahdoot M, Wilbur AR, Reese SE, Lebastchi AH, Mehralivand S, Gomella PT, et al. MRI-Targeted, Systematic, and Combined Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:917–28.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1910038
pubmed: 32130814
pmcid: 7323919
Sathianathen NJ, Omer A, Harriss E, Davies L, Kasivisvanathan V, Punwani S, et al. Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Era: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2020;78:402–14.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.048
pubmed: 32444265
Sonn GA, Fan RE, Ghanouni P, Wang NN, Brooks JD, Loening AM, et al. Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Interpretation Varies Substantially Across Radiologists. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;5:592–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2017.11.010
pubmed: 29226826
Jiao B, Gulati R, Hendrix N, Gore JL, Rais-Bahrami S, Morgan TM, et al. Economic Evaluation of Urine-Based or Magnetic Resonance Imaging Reflex Tests in Men With Intermediate Prostate-Specific Antigen Levels in the United States. Value Health. 2021;24:1111–7.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2021.02.009
pubmed: 34372976
pmcid: 8358184
Leapman MS, Wang R, Park HS, Yu JB, Sprenkle PC, Dinan MA, et al. Adoption of New Risk Stratification Technologies Within US Hospital Referral Regions and Association With Prostate Cancer Management. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4:e2128646.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.28646
pubmed: 34623406
pmcid: 8501394