Diagnostic accuracy of [-2]proPSA versus Gleason score and Prostate Health Index versus Gleason score for the determination of aggressive prostate cancer: a systematic review

被引:1
|
作者
Anyango, Ruth [1 ,2 ]
Ojwando, Joel [1 ,2 ]
Mwita, Clifford [1 ,2 ]
Mugalo, Edward [2 ]
机构
[1] ARA JBI Ctr Excellence, Nairobi, Kenya
[2] Moi Univ Sch Med, Eldoret, Kenya
关键词
diagnostic accuracy; p2PSA; prostate cancer; Prostate Health Index; systematic review; PSA-RELATED INDEXES; ANTIGEN; 3; PCA3; STANDARD TEST PSA; SERUM ISOFORM; SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVES; RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; PATHOLOGICAL OUTCOMES; CLINICAL UTILITY; INITIAL BIOPSY; JAPANESE MEN;
D O I
10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00194
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: The objective of this review was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of [-2]proPSA (p2PSA) and the Prostate Health Index compared to the Gleason score in determining the aggressiveness of prostate cancer. Introduction: Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in men. However, the utility of currently available biomarkers for determining the aggressive form of the disease remains unknown. This review sought to determine the diagnostic accuracy of two new biomarkers in determining the aggressive form of prostate cancer. Inclusion criteria: Diagnostic accuracy studies that enrolled men of any age and any prostate specific antigen (PSA) level with histologically confirmed prostate cancer in which Prostate Health Index and p2PSA were assessed in comparison to Gleason score for the determination of aggressive prostate cancer were considered for inclusion. There was no time limitation on study inclusion. Methods: A three-step search strategy was utilized to identify both published and unpublished studies in the English language in the following sources: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Web of Science, Google Scholar, MedNar, and SIGLE. Databases were searched from inception to January 2019. Study selection, critical appraisal, data extraction, and data synthesis were done according to the approach recommended by JBI. Results: A total of 12 studies (n = 8462) that recruited men with aggressive prostate cancer were considered in this review. The majority of included subjects had a total PSA level of 2 to 10ng/mL. The sensitivity of the Prostate Health Index ranged from 67% to 97% while specificity ranged from 6% to 64%. At a Prostate Health Index threshold of 25 and below (three studies, n = 3222), pooled sensitivity was 97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95% to 98%) and specificity was 10% (95% CI, 6% to 16%). At a Prostate Health Index threshold of between 26 and 35 (six studies, n = 6030), pooled sensitivity was 87% (95% CI, 8% to 91%) and specificity was 45% (95% CI, 39% to 50%). At a Prostate Health Index threshold of 36 and above (five studies, n = 1476), pooled sensitivity was 72% (95% CI, 64% to 79%) and specificity was 74% (95% CI, 68% to 80%). Only one study assessed p2PSA. Sensitivity ranged from 80% to 95%, and specificity ranged from 9.9% to 27.9% with increasing threshold values from 7.9 to 10.9ng/mL. Conclusions: Overall, both Prostate Health Index and p2PSA have acceptable accuracy for the determination of the likelihood of aggressive prostate cancer. However, the inverse relationship between sensitivity and specificity makes it difficult to determine an optimum cut-off value for positivity. Further research is warranted to determine their utility in the management of prostate cancer.
引用
收藏
页码:1263 / 1291
页数:29
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Gleason Score 6-Prostate Cancer or Benign Variant?
    Knuechel, Ruth
    ONCOLOGY RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2015, 38 (12) : 629 - 632
  • [32] Impact of reporting rules of biopsy Gleason score for prostate cancer
    Kuroiwa, K.
    Uchino, H.
    Yokomizo, A.
    Naito, S.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY, 2009, 62 (03) : 260 - 263
  • [33] DNA Ploidy as Surrogate for Biopsy Gleason Score for Preoperative Organ Versus Nonorgan-confined Prostate Cancer Prediction
    Isharwal, Sumit
    Miller, M. Craig
    Epstein, Jonathan I.
    Mangold, Leslie A.
    Humphreys, Elizabeth
    Partin, Alan W.
    Veltri, Robert W.
    UROLOGY, 2009, 73 (05) : 1092 - 1097
  • [34] Role of prostate health index to predict Gleason score upgrading and high-risk prostate cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens
    Kim, Hwanik
    Jung, Gyoohwan
    Kim, Jin Hyuck
    Byun, Seok-Soo
    Hong, Sung Kyu
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2021, 11 (01)
  • [35] Should we replace the Gleason score with the amount of high-grade prostate cancer?
    Vis, Andre N.
    Roemeling, Stijn
    Kranse, Ries
    Schroder, Fritz H.
    van der Kwast, Theo H.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2007, 51 (04) : 931 - 939
  • [36] Extended 12-core prostate biopsy increases both the detection of prostate cancer and the accuracy of Gleason score
    Elabbady, AA
    Khedr, MM
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2006, 49 (01) : 49 - 53
  • [37] Diagnostic utility of three Tesla diffusion tensor imaging in prostate cancer: correlation with Gleason score values
    Abouelkheir, Rasha Taha
    Aboshamia, Yasmin Ibrahim
    Taman, Saher Ebrahim
    EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2022, 53 (01)
  • [38] Testosterone as a prospective predictor of pathological Gleason score and pathological stage in prostate cancer
    Drobkova, Henrieta
    Jurecekova, Jana
    Grendar, Marian
    Kliment, Jan, Jr.
    Halasova, Erika
    Kliment, Jan
    GENERAL PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOPHYSICS, 2017, 36 (05) : 549 - 556
  • [39] Decreased fucosylated PSA as a urinary marker for high Gleason score prostate cancer
    Fujita, Kazutoshi
    Hayashi, Takuji
    Matsuzaki, Kyosuke
    Nakata, Wataru
    Masuda, Mika
    Kawashima, Atsunari
    Ujike, Takeshi
    Nagahara, Akira
    Tsuchiya, Mutsumi
    Kobayashi, Yuka
    Nojima, Satoshi
    Uemura, Motohide
    Morii, Eiichi
    Miyoshi, Eiji
    Nonomura, Norio
    ONCOTARGET, 2016, 7 (35) : 56643 - 56649
  • [40] Association between the dihydrotestosterone level in the prostate and prostate cancer aggressiveness using the gleason score
    Nishiyama, Tsutomu
    Ikarashi, Toshihiko
    Hashimoto, Yutaka
    Suzuki, Kazuya
    Takahashi, Kota
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2006, 176 (04) : 1387 - 1391