scholarly journals Clinical utility of a serum biomarker panel in distinguishing prostate cancer from benign prostate hyperplasia

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Kiebish ◽  
Poornima Tekumalla ◽  
Shobha Ravipaty ◽  
Albert Dobi ◽  
Shiv Srivastava ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Unmet Need ◽  
False Negatives ◽  
Prostate Hyperplasia ◽  
Biomarker Panel ◽  
Improved Performance ◽  
Benign Prostate ◽  
Better Than

AbstractProstate-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.

scholarly journals Analysis of Urinary Prostate-Specific Antigen Glycoforms in Samples of Prostate Cancer and Benign Prostate Hyperplasia

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chun-Jen Hsiao ◽  
Tzong-Shin Tzai ◽  
Chein-Hung Chen ◽  
Wen-Horng Yang ◽  
Chung-Hsuan Chen
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Benign Prostate Hyperplasia ◽  
Clinical Sample ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Ion Accumulation ◽  
Detection Sensitivity ◽  
Prostate Hyperplasia ◽  
Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass ◽  
Benign Prostate

Glycans of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in prostate cancer were found to be different from that in benign disease. It is difficult to analyze heterogeneous PSA glycoforms in each individual specimen because of low protein abundance and the limitation of detection sensitivity. We developed a method for prostate cancer diagnosis based on PSA glycoforms. Specific glycoforms were screened in each clinical sample based on liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry with ion accumulation. To look for potential biomarkers, normalized abundance of each glycoform in benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) and in prostate cancer was evaluated. The PSA glycoform, Hex5HexNAc4NeuAc1dHex1, and monosialylated, sialylated, and unfucosylated glycoforms differed significantly between the prostate cancer and BPH samples. The detection sensitivity (87.5%) and specificity (60%) for prostate cancer identification are higher than those of the serum PSA marker. As low as 100 amol PSA could be detected with the ion accumulation method which has not been reported before. The improved detection specificity can help reduce unnecessary examinations.

scholarly journals Serum and Saliva Concentrations of Biochemical Parameters in Men with Prostate Cancer and Benign Prostate Hyperplasia

2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-251
Author(s):  
Hyder Farahani ◽  
Mona Alaee ◽  
Jamal Amri ◽  
Mahmoud-Reza Baghinia ◽  
Mohammad Rafiee
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Biochemical Parameters ◽  
Biochemical Analysis ◽  
Operating Characteristic ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Diagnostic Efficacy ◽  
Prostate Hyperplasia ◽  
Benign Prostate ◽  
Control Study

Abstract Objectives To find suitable biomarkers for diagnosis of prostate cancer (PC) in serum and saliva; also, to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of saliva in patients with PC. Methods This case-control study included 20 patients with PC and 20 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Blood and saliva were collected from the participants and centrifuged. Serum and supernatant saliva were used for biochemical analysis. We evaluated serum and salivary levels of urea, creatinine, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), creatine kinase BB (CK-BB), zinc, β-2 microglobulin (B2M), and melatonin. Also, we used Mann-Whitney U testing, Spearman correlation coefficients, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to evaluate the data. Results Serum and salivary concentrations of urea, creatinine, PSA, CK-BB, zinc, and B2M were significantly higher in patients with PC, compared with the BPH group (P <.05). However, serum and salivary concentrations of melatonin were significantly lower in patients with PC, compared with BPH group (P <.05). In both groups, salivary concentrations of all markers were lower (P <.05), compared with those values in serum. We observed positive correlation between serum and salivary concentrations of all markers studied (P <.05). Conclusion From the data, we conclude that investigation using saliva specimens is a noninvasive, simple, and effective tool for screening of biochemical parameters.

scholarly journals Detection of Tear Biomarkers for Future Prostate Cancer Diagnosis

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong Li
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Benign Prostate Hyperplasia ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Clinical Proteomics ◽  
Prostate Hyperplasia ◽  
Psa Test ◽  
Diagnosis And Prognosis ◽  
Novel Biomarkers ◽  
Unique Source ◽  
Benign Prostate

Prostate cancer (CaP) continues to be the second leading cause of cancer-specific death in men in Western countries. The marker currently used for CaP detection is an increase in serum prostate specific antigen (PSA). However, the PSA test may give false positive or negative information and does not allow the differentiation of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH), non-aggressive CaP and aggressive CaP. Tears are a unique source of body fluid and contain proteins, peptides, mucins and lipids, which is useful for studying clinical proteomics. Advances in the field of proteomics have greatly enhanced the study of tears, with a greater number of proteins now being identified in tears. Identification of novel biomarkers in tear is a new area of development. Modern advances in the field of proteomic techniques hold the promise of providing the clinical oncologists with new tools to find novel CaP biomarkers for early diagnosis and prognosis.

scholarly journals Urinary PSA in monitoring of patients with prostate cancer

2012 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomislav Pejcic ◽  
V. Dimitrijevic ◽  
Jovan Hadzi-Djokic
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Benign Prostate Hyperplasia ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy ◽  
Secretory Cells ◽  
Prostate Hyperplasia ◽  
Retropubic Prostatectomy ◽  
Androgen Suppression ◽  
Antiandrogen Therapy ◽  
Benign Prostate

Objective: To estimate the value of urinary prostate specific antigen (uPSA) determination in the monitoring of prostate cancer (PCa) patients. Material and methods: From January 2001 to December 2011, uPSA was determined in 397 patients. There were 265 patients with benign prostate, 19 with prostatitis and 113 with prostate cancer. Radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) was performed at 65 patients, while 48 patients had PCa received antiandrogen therapy. Results: Average uPSA value in the patients with benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) was 190.8+184.2 ng/mL. Average uPSA in the patients with PCa was 287.5+303.4 ng/ml and it was not significantly different from BPH group. The average uPSA in the prostatitis group was 113.1+148.5 ng/mL, and 16.4+36.7 ng/mL in the post RRP group. During antiandrogen therapy, uPSA and PSA correlated significantly (r=0.49). Conclusion: The uPSA level reflects the response of normal prostatic and urethral secretory cells on total androgen activity. The uPSA level cannot distinguish the cases with BPH and cases with PCa. In addition, in the patients after RRP, uPSA reflects local urethral PSA production and has no role in the diagnosis of PCa recurrence. However, uPSA is better indicator of androgen suppression than testosterone (T), as it reflects the effect of suppression of all androgens, not only T.

Using a combination of urine and plasma biomarkers for the development of a scoring sytem that can diagnose and predict prognosis of prostate cancer.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 163-163
Author(s):  
Maher Albitar ◽  
Wanlong Ma ◽  
Kevin Diep ◽  
Ferras S. Albitar ◽  
Herbert A. Fritsche ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Scoring System ◽  
Characteristic Curve ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Prostate Hyperplasia ◽  
Plasma Biomarkers ◽  
Benign Pathology ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Patient Prognosis ◽  
Benign Prostate

163 Background: Relying solely on serum prostate-specific antigen (sPSA) to screen for prostate cancer (PCa) can lead to unnecessary biopsies. Biomarkers from urine and plasma were isolated to develop a detection scoring system for the presence of prostate cancer as well as to better predict aggressiveness. Methods: Urine and plasma specimens were analyzed from 141 patients (61 newly diagnosed PCa patients, 60 benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) patients, and 20 post-prostatectomy patients) using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for the levels of UAP1, PDLIM5, IMPDH2, HSPD1, PCA3, PSA, TMPRSS2, ERG, GAPDH, and B2M genes. Patient age, sPSA level, and PCR data were entered through multiple algorithms to determine models most useful for detection of cancer and predicting aggressiveness. Results: We developed an algorithm for distinguishing PCa from BPH (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC] of 0.78). Another algorithm distinguishes patients with Gleason Score (GS) ≥ 7 from GS < 7 cancer or BPH (AUROC of 0.88). By incorporating the two algorithms into a scoring system, 75% of the analyzed samples showed concordance between the two models (99% specificity and 68% sensitivity for predicting GS ≥ 7), and 25% showed discordance. Conclusions: A scoring system incorporating two algorithms using urine and plasma biomarkers highly predicts the presence of GS ≥ 7 PCa in 75% of patients. In 25% of patients, the system can be used only to distinguish between the presence of cancer and benign pathology. Our algorithms may assist with both biopsy indication as well as patient prognosis. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Combined Hypermethylation of APC and GSTP1 as a Molecular Marker for Prostate Cancer

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (7) ◽  
pp. 987-992 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyung-Yoon Yoon ◽  
Seon-Kyu Kim ◽  
Young-Won Kim ◽  
Ho Won Kang ◽  
Sang-Cheol Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Methylation Level ◽  
Operating Characteristic ◽  
Single Gene ◽  
Methylation Status ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Glutathione S Transferase ◽  
Prostate Hyperplasia ◽  
Methylation Score ◽  
Benign Prostate

A total of 149 human prostate tissues obtained from our institute were assessed: 52 specimens of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) and 97 specimens of prostate cancer (PCa). The methylation status of the genes of Adenomatous polyposis coli ( APC) and glutathione-S-transferase-P1 ( GSTP1) was analyzed by quantitative pyrosequencing. A methylation score (M score) was calculated to capture the combined methylation level of both genes. The methylation level of each single gene and that of both genes combined was significantly higher in PCa specimens than in BPH (each p < 0.001). The value of APC methylation, GSTP1 methylation, and M score for predicting PCa was measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and reached 0.954, 0.942, and 0.983, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the M score in discriminating between PCa and BPH reached 92.8% and 100.0%, respectively. The M score was positively associated with the serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level ( p trend < 0.001). Our study demonstrates that the quantitative measurement of two methylation markers might drastically improve the ability to discriminate PCa from BPH.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document