World Journal of Urology

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 305–311 | Cite as

Diagnostic significance of [−2]pro-PSA and prostate dimension-adjusted PSA-related indices in men with total PSA in the 2.0–10.0 ng/mL range

  • Kazuto Ito
  • Mai Miyakubo
  • Yoshitaka Sekine
  • Hidekazu Koike
  • Hiroshi Matsui
  • Yasuhiro Shibata
  • Kazuhiro Suzuki
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

One of the most important issues to address when developing an optimal screening system for prostate cancer is investigating appropriate biopsy indications following serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurements in order to maintain high sensitivity and avoid unnecessary biopsy.

Methods

Between April 2004 and December 2007, 239 consecutive men with total PSA levels of 2.0–10.0 ng/mL underwent measurements of PSA, free PSA, and [−2]pro-PSA. We assessed the significance of laboratory-based PSA-related indices including free PSA/total PSA (%f-PSA), p2PSA/free PSA (%p2PSA), p2PSA/%f-PSA, Prostate Health Index (phi, an index combining PSA, free PSA, and p2PSA), total prostate volume (TPV)-adjusted PSA-related indices, including PSA density, %p2PSA density, p2PSA/%f-PSA density, and phi density, and transition zone (TZ) prostate volume-adjusted PSA-related indices such as PSA TZ density (PSATZD), %p2PSA TZD, p2PSA/%fPSA TZD, and phi TZD.

Results

The positive biopsy rate was 22.2 %. When sensitivity was fixed at 95 %, unnecessary biopsies could be avoided in 28 % of men when phi was used as a biopsy indication. In cases where total and transition zone prostate volumes were available, the use of %p2PSA density, phi density, p2PSA/%f-PSA TZD, and phi TZD resulted in the avoidance of 48, 47, 54, and 54 % of unnecessary biopsies, respectively, while maintaining a high sensitivity of 90 %.

Conclusions

At 90 and 95 % sensitivity, laboratory-based indices containing p2PSA, particularly phi, showed significantly greater specificity for prostate cancer as compared with %f-PSA. The diagnostic accuracy of prostate volume-adjusted p2PSA-related indices could be excellent, particularly the transition zone volume-adjusted indices at fixed sensitivities of 95 and 90 %.

Keywords

Free PSA pro-PSA Prostate cancer PSA Screening 

Notes

Conflict of interest

There are no finance disclosures from any of the authors. None of the authors have conflicts of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported, and none have any financial support from industrial companies that are related with this research.

References

  1. 1.
    Catalona WJ, Smith DS, Ratliff TL et al (1991) Measurement of prostate specific antigen in serum as a screening test for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 324:1156–1161PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Catalona WJ, Richie JP, Ahmann FR et al (1994) Comparison of digital rectal examination and serum prostate specific antigen in the early detection of prostate cancer: result of a multicenter trial of 6,630 men. J Urol 151:1283–1290PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Catalona WJ, Smith DS, Wolfert RL et al (1995) Evaluation of percentage of free serum prostate specific antigen to improve specificity of prostate cancer screening. JAMA 274:1214–1220PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Prestigiacomo AF, Lilja H, Pettersson K, Wolfert RL, Stamey TA (1996) A comparison of the free fraction of serum prostate specific antigen in men with benign and cancerous prostates: the best-case scenario. J Urol 156:350–354PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Partin AW, Catalona WJ, Southwick PC, Subong EN, Gasior GH, Chan DW (1996) Analysis of percent free prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for prostate cancer detection: influence of total PSA, prostate volume, and age. Urology 48:55–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kikuchi E, Nakashima J, Ishibashi M et al (2000) Prostate specific antigen adjusted for transition zone volume: the most powerful method for detecting prostate carcinoma. Cancer 89:842–849PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kumar A, Mikolajczyk SD, Goel AS, Millar LS, Saedi MS (1997) Expression of pro form of prostate specific antigen by mammalian cells and its conversion to mature, active form by human kallikrein 2. Cancer Res 57:3111–3114PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chan TY, Mikolajczyk SD, Lecksell K et al (2003) Immunohistochemical staining of prostate cancer with monoclonal antibodies to the precursor of prostate-specific antigen. Urology 62:177–181PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stephan C, Kahrs AM, Cammann H et al (2009) A [−2]pro-PSA-based artificial neural network significantly improves differentiation between prostate cancer and benign prostatic diseases. Prostate 69:198–207PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sokoll LJ, Sanda MG, Feng Z et al (2010) A prospective, multicenter, National Cancer Institute Early Detection Research Network study of [−2]pro-PSA: improving prostate cancer detection and correlating with cancer aggressiveness. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 19:1193–1200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miyakubo M, Ito K, Yamamoto T, Takechi H, Ohi M, Suzuki K (2009) Proprostate-specific antigen: its usefulness in the era of multiple-core prostate biopsy. Int J Urol 16:561–565PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Le BV, Griffin CR, Loeb S et al (2010) [−2]Proenzyme prostate specific antigen is more accurate than total and free prostate specific antigen in differentiating prostate cancer from benign disease in a prospective prostate cancer screening study. J Urol 183:1355–1359PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Catalona WJ, Partin AW, Sanda MG et al (2011) A multicenter study of [−2]pro-prostate specific antigen combined with prostate specific antigen and free prostate specific antigen for prostate cancer detection in the 2.0 to 10.0 ng/ml prostate specific antigen range. J Urol 185:1650–1655PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ito K, Ohi M, Yamamoto T et al (2002) The diagnostic accuracy of the age-adjusted and prostate volume-adjusted biopsy method in males with prostate specific antigen levels of 4.1–10.0 ng/ml. Cancer 95:2112–2119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nomura M, Ito K, Miyakubo M et al (2012) Development and external validation of a nomogram for predicting cancer probability at initial prostate biopsy using the life expectancy-adjusted and prostate volume-adjusted biopsy scheme. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 15:202–209PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bangma CH, Wildhagen MF, Yurdakul G, Schröder FH, Blijenberg BG (2004) The value of (−7, −5) pro-prostate-specific antigen and human kallikrein-2 as serum markers for grading prostate cancer. BJU Int 93:720–724PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stephan C, Meyer HA, Kwiatkowski M et al (2006) A (−5, −7) pro-PSA-based artificial neural network to detect prostate cancer. Eur Urol 50:1014–1020PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lein M, Semjonow A, Graefen M et al (2005) A multicenter clinical trial on the use of (−5, −7) pro prostate specific antigen. J Urol 174:2150–2153PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Catalona WJ, Bartsch G, Rittenhouse HG et al (2004) Serum pro-prostate specific antigen preferentially detects aggressive prostate cancers in men with 2 to 4 ng/mL prostate specific antigen. J Urol 171:2239–2244PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Terris MK, Stamey TA (1991) Determination of prostate volume by transrectal ultrasound. J Urol 145:984–987PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Alkan I, Türkeri L, Biren T, Cevik I, Akdaş A (1996) Volume determinations by transrectal ultrasonography in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia: correlation with removed prostate weight. Int Urol Nephrol 28:517–523PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rodriguez E Jr, Skarecky D, Narula N, Ahlering TE (2008) Prostate volume estimation using the ellipsoid formula consistently underestimates actual gland size. J Urol 179:501–503PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Semjonow A, Köpke T, Eltze E et al (2010) Pre-analytical in vitro stability of [−2]pro-PSA in blood and serum. Clin Biochem 43:926–928PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kazuto Ito
    • 1
  • Mai Miyakubo
    • 1
  • Yoshitaka Sekine
    • 1
  • Hidekazu Koike
    • 1
  • Hiroshi Matsui
    • 1
  • Yasuhiro Shibata
    • 1
  • Kazuhiro Suzuki
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of UrologyGunma University Graduate School of MedicineMaebashiJapan

Personalised recommendations