The role of prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) in prostate cancer detection.

INTRODUCTION: The prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) score has been the first urine assay to obtain the Food and Drug Administration approval for guiding decisions regarding additional biopsies. Different aspects of this urinary assay (diagnostic performance, prognostic value, cost/benefit balance, integration with other molecular and imaging modalities) have now been well evaluated. Areas covered: This expert review will summarize current achievements and future perspectives provided by this urine biomarker. Expert commentary: The clinical benefit of the PCA3 score, in addition to the other established factors has been demonstrated before regarding biopsy decision making in men with persistent risk of prostate cancer. Its potential prognostic value also suggests its usefulness in selecting low risk patients for active surveillance protocols, however future daily-practice changing studies are needed. Economics assessment and additional value compared with other biomolecular and imaging modalities are still under investigation.

Longitudinal assessment of urinary PCA3 for predicting prostate cancer grade reclassification in favorable-risk men during active surveillance.

BACKGROUND: To assess the utility of urinary prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) as both a one-time and longitudinal measure in men on active surveillance (AS). METHODS: The Johns Hopkins AS program monitors men with favorable-risk prostate cancer with serial PSA, digital rectal examination (DRE), prostate magnetic resonance imaging and prostate biopsy. Since 2007, post-DRE urinary specimens have also been routinely obtained. Men with multiple PCA3 measures obtained over ⩾3 years of monitoring were included. Utility of first PCA3 score (fPCA3), subsequent PCA3 (sPCA3) and change in PCA3 were assessed for prediction of Gleason grade reclassification (GR, Gleason score >6) during follow-up. RESULTS: In total, 260 men met study criteria. Median time from enrollment to fPCA3 was 2 years (interquartile range (IQR) 1-3) and from fPCA3 to sPCA3 was 5 years (IQR 4-6). During median follow-up of 6 years (IQR 5-8), 28 men (11%) underwent GR. Men with GR had higher median fPCA3 (48.0 vs 24.5, P=0.007) and sPCA3 (63.5 vs 36.0, P=0.002) than those without GR, while longitudinal change in PCA3 did not differ by GR status (log-normalized rate 0.07 vs 0.06, P=0.53). In a multivariable model including age, risk classification and PSA density, fPCA3 remained significantly associated with GR (log(fPCA3) odds ratio=1.77, P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: PCA3 scores obtained during AS were higher in men who underwent GR, but the rate of change in PCA3 over time did not differ by GR status. PCA3 was a significant predictor of GR in a multivariable model including conventional risk factors, suggesting that PCA3 provides incremental prognostic information in the AS setting.

Urine TMPRSS2:ERG Plus PCA3 for Individualized Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment.

BACKGROUND: TMPRSS2:ERG (T2:ERG) and prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) are the most advanced urine-based prostate cancer (PCa) early detection biomarkers. OBJECTIVE: Validate logistic regression models, termed Mi-Prostate Score (MiPS), that incorporate serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA; or the multivariate Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator version 1.0 [PCPTrc]) and urine T2:ERG and PCA3 scores for predicting PCa and high-grade PCa on biopsy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: T2:ERG and PCA3 scores were generated using clinical-grade transcription-mediated amplification assays. Pretrained MiPS models were applied to a validation cohort of whole urine samples prospectively collected after digital rectal examination from 1244 men presenting for biopsy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Area under the curve (AUC) was used to compare the performance of serum PSA (or the PCPTrc) alone and MiPS models. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to assess clinical benefit. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Among informative validation cohort samples (n=1225 [98%], 80% from patients presenting for initial biopsy), models incorporating T2:ERG had significantly greater AUC than PSA (or PCPTrc) for predicting PCa (PSA: 0.693 vs 0.585; PCPTrc: 0.718 vs 0.639; both p<0.001) or high-grade (Gleason score >6) PCa on biopsy (PSA: 0.729 vs 0.651, p<0.001; PCPTrc: 0.754 vs 0.707, p=0.006). MiPS models incorporating T2:ERG score had significantly greater AUC (all p<0.001) than models incorporating only PCA3 plus PSA (or PCPTrc or high-grade cancer PCPTrc [PCPThg]). DCA demonstrated net benefit of the MiPS_PCPTrc (or MiPS_PCPThg) model compared with the PCPTrc (or PCPThg) across relevant threshold probabilities. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating urine T2:ERG and PCA3 scores improves the performance of serum PSA (or PCPTrc) for predicting PCa and high-grade PCa on biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY: Incorporation of two prostate cancer (PCa)-specific biomarkers (TMPRSS2:ERG and PCA3) measured in the urine improved on serum prostate-specific antigen (or a multivariate risk calculator) for predicting the presence of PCa and high-grade PCa on biopsy. A combined test, Mi-Prostate Score, uses models validated in this study and is clinically available to provide individualized risk estimates.

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PROGENSA® prostate cancer antigen 3 assay and the Prostate Health Index in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: There is no single definitive test to identify prostate cancer in men. Biopsies are commonly used to obtain samples of prostate tissue for histopathological examination. However, this approach frequently misses cases of cancer, meaning that repeat biopsies may be necessary to obtain a diagnosis. The PROGENSA(®) prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) assay (Hologic Gen-Probe, Marlborough, MA, USA) and the Prostate Health Index (phi; Beckman Coulter Inc., Brea, CA, USA) are two new tests (a urine test and a blood test, respectively) that are designed to be used to help clinicians decide whether or not to recommend a repeat biopsy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PCA3 assay and the phi in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. DATA SOURCES: Multiple publication databases and trial registers were searched in May 2014 (from 2000 to May 2014), including MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Science, Medion, Aggressive Research Intelligence Facility database, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Register and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. REVIEW METHODS: The assessment of clinical effectiveness involved three separate systematic reviews, namely reviews of the analytical validity, the clinical validity of these tests and the clinical utility of these tests. The assessment of cost-effectiveness comprised a systematic review of full economic evaluations and the development of a de novo economic model. SETTING: The perspective of the evaluation was the NHS in England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Men suspected of having prostate cancer for whom the results of an initial prostate biopsy were negative or equivocal. INTERVENTIONS: The use of the PCA3 score or phi in combination with existing tests (including histopathology results, prostate-specific antigen level and digital rectal examination), multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and clinical judgement. RESULTS: In addition to documents published by the manufacturers, six studies were identified for inclusion in the analytical validity review. The review identified issues concerning the precision of the PCA3 assay measurements. It also highlighted issues relating to the storage requirements and stability of samples intended for analysis using the phi assay. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria for the clinical validity review. These studies reported results for 10 different clinical comparisons. There was insufficient evidence to enable the identification of appropriate test threshold values for use in a clinical setting. In addition, the implications of adding either the PCA3 assay or the phi to clinical assessment were not clear. Furthermore, the addition of the PCA3 assay or the phi to clinical assessment plus magnetic resonance imaging was not found to improve discrimination. No published papers met the inclusion criteria for either the clinical utility review or the cost-effectiveness review. The results from the cost-effectiveness analyses indicated that using either the PCA3 assay or the phi in the NHS was not cost-effective. LIMITATIONS: The main limitations of the systematic review of clinical validity are that the review conclusions are over-reliant on findings from one study, the descriptions of clinical assessment vary widely within reviewed studies and many of the reported results for the clinical validity outcomes do not include either standard errors or confidence intervals. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical benefit of using the PCA3 assay or the phi in combination with existing tests, scans and clinical judgement has not yet been confirmed. The results from the cost-effectiveness analyses indicate that the use of these tests in the NHS would not be cost-effective. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014009595. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Assessment of long-term outcomes associated with urinary prostate cancer antigen 3 and TMPRSS2:ERG gene fusion at repeat biopsy.

BACKGROUND: In men with clinically localized prostate cancer who have undergone at least 1 previous negative biopsy and have elevated serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, long-term health outcomes associated with the assessment of urinary prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) and the transmembrane protease, serine 2 (TMPRSS2):v-ets erythroblastosis virus E26 oncogene homolog (avian) (ERG) gene fusion (T2:ERG) have not been investigated previously in relation to the decision to recommend a repeat biopsy. METHODS: The authors performed a decision analysis using a decision tree for men with elevated PSA levels. The probability of cancer was estimated using the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator (version 2.0). The use of PSA alone was compared with the use of PCA3 and T2:ERG scores, with each evaluated independently, in combination with PSA to trigger a repeat biopsy. When PCA3 and T2:ERG score evaluations were used, predefined thresholds were established to determine whether the patient should undergo a repeat biopsy. Biopsy outcomes were defined as either positive (with a Gleason score of <7, 7, or >7) or negative. Probabilities and estimates of 10-year overall survival and 15-year cancer-specific survival were derived from previous studies and a literature review. Outcomes were defined as age-dependent and Gleason score-dependent 10-year overall and 15-year cancer-specific survival rates and the percentage of biopsies avoided. RESULTS: Incorporating the PCA3 score (biopsy threshold, 25; generated based on the urine PCA3 level normalized to the amount of PSA messenger RNA) or the T2:ERG score (biopsy threshold, 10; based on the urine T2:ERG level normalized to the amount of PSA messenger RNA) into the decision to recommend repeat biopsy would have avoided 55.4% or 64.7% of repeat biopsies for the base-case patient, respectively, and changes in the 10-year survival rate were only 0.93% or 1.41%, respectively. Multi-way sensitivity analyses suggested that these results were robust with respect to the model parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The use of PCA3 or T2:ERG testing for repeat biopsy decisions can substantially reduce the number of biopsies without significantly affecting 10-year survival.

Comprehensive assessment for novel prostate cancer markers in the prostate-specific antigen era: focusing on Asians and Asian countries.

We reviewed the current evidence for three novel prostate tumor markers (PCA3, TMPRSS2:ERG and proPSA) that have been recently reported predominantly in Western countries. We focus our attention on Asian men in both clinical and basic research studies. There have been no reports on the clinical usefulness of these three markers for Asians living in Western countries. In Asian countries, evidence for the clinical usefulness of PCA3 and proPSA-related indices including Prostate Health Index is being accumulated, mainly in Japan. The process for how a novel marker is approved in the clinical setting is also discussed.

The PCA3 test for guiding repeat biopsy of prostate cancer and its cut-off score: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The specificity of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for early intervention in repeat biopsy is unsatisfactory. Prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) may be more accurate in outcome prediction than other methods for the early detection of prostate cancer (PCa). However, the results were inconsistent in repeated biopsies. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the role of PCA3 in outcome prediction. A systematic bibliographic search was conducted for articles published before April 2013, using PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Embase and other databases from health technology assessment agencies. The quality of the studies was assessed on the basis of QUADAS criteria. Eleven studies of diagnostic tests with moderate to high quality were selected. A meta-analysis was carried out to synthesize the results. The results of the meta-analyses were heterogeneous among studies. We performed a subgroup analysis (with or without inclusion of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) and atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP)). Using a PCA3 cutoff of 20 or 35, in the two sub-groups, the global sensitivity values were 0.93 or 0.80 and 0.79 or 0.75, specificities were 0.65 or 0.44 and 0.78 or 0.70, positive likelihood ratios were 1.86 or 1.58 and 2.49 or 1.78, negative likelihood ratios were 0.81 or 0.43 and 0.91 or 0.82 and diagnostic odd ratios (ORs) were 5.73 or 3.45 and 7.13 or 4.11, respectively. The areas under the curve (AUCs) of the summary receiver operating characteristic curve were 0.85 or 0.72 and 0.81 or 0.69, respectively. PCA3 can be used for repeat biopsy of the prostate to improve accuracy of PCa detection. Unnecessary biopsies can be avoided by using a PCa cutoff score of 20.

Critical assessment of preoperative urinary prostate cancer antigen 3 on the accuracy of prostate cancer staging.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge about the staging significance of the prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) score to better identify pathologic features after radical prostatectomy (RP) is limited and controversial. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to study the clinical staging significance of PCA3 to identify pathologic favorable and/or unfavorable features in the RP specimen. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Complete retrospective clinical and pathologic data of consecutive men who had undergone RP from three tertiary referral centers including preoperative PCA3 scores (n=305) and computer-assisted planimetrically measured tumor volume data (n=160) were available. INTERVENTION: All patients were treated with RP. MEASUREMENTS: PCA3 scores were assessed using the PROGENSA assay (Gen-Probe, San Diego, CA, USA). Beyond standard risk factors (age, digital rectal examination, prostate-specific antigen, prostate volume, biopsy Gleason score, percentage of positive cores), five different PCA3 codings were used in logistic regression models to identify five distinct pathologic end points: (1) low-volume disease (<0.5 ml), (2) insignificant prostate cancer (PCa) according to the Epstein criteria, (3) extracapsular extension (ECE), (4) seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), and (5) aggressive disease defined as Gleason sum ≥7. Accuracy estimates of each end point were quantified using the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operator characteristic analysis in models with and without PCA3. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: PCA3 scores were significantly lower in low-volume disease and insignificant PCa (p ≤ 0.001). AUC of multivariable low-volume disease (+2.4 to +5.5%) and insignificant PCa models (+3 to +3.9%) increased when PCA3 was added to standard clinical risk factors. In contradistinction, regardless of its coding, PCA3 scores were not significantly elevated in pathologically confirmed ECE (p=0.4) or SVI (p=0.5), respectively. Higher PCA3 scores were associated with aggressive disease (p<0.001). Importantly, the addition of PCA3 to multivariable intermediate- and high-grade models did not improve prediction. Despite reporting the largest pathologic PCA3 study, the main limitation resides in its small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: PCA3 was confirmed as a valuable predictor of pathologically confirmed low-volume disease and insignificant PCa. Further exploration of its role as an additional marker to select patients for active surveillance may be warranted. In contradistinction, assessment of pathologically advanced or aggressive PCa is not improved using PCA3.

DD23 Biomarker: a prospective clinical assessment in routine urinary cytology specimens from patients being monitored for TCC.

BACKGROUND: A prospective clinical study was conducted to assess the ability of the DD23 murine monoclonal antibody to enhance detection of bladder cancer in routine alcohol fixed urine cytology samples. METHODS: Prospectively, 308 bladder cytology specimens were obtained from patients with a history of bladder cancer with a mean age of 71.4+/-11.9 (27% female, 73% male). Data included 121 biopsy-confirmed results and 187 cystoscopy results to assess presence or absence of cancer. Thirty-five normal cytology specimens were obtained from asymptomatic men and women between 55-85 years of age. Separate slides from the alcohol fixed cytology specimens were stained using the Papanicolaou (Pap) and Feulgen staining procedures. The DD23 assay was performed using an avidin-biotin alkaline phosphatase immunocytochemical procedure, with a single urothelial cell exhibiting intense immunostaining sufficient to make a positive call. RESULTS: Pap-Feulgen cytopathology for the 308 cases yielded an overall sensitivity of 65.5% and a specificity of 85.1%, and the DD23 biomarker alone yielded a sensitivity of 80.5% and a specificity of 59.7%. Analysis of the voided urines only (n=164) yielded sensitivities of 61.0% and 73.2% and specificities of 86.2% and 67.5% for cytopathology and DD23 alone, respectively. Results in 49 bladder wash urine cytology cases produced a sensitivity of 70.2% and 100% and specificities of 92.3% and 61.5% for cytopathology and DD23 alone, respectively. In 133 patients that underwent biopsy or had positive cystoscopy results, cytopathology yielded a sensitivity of 65.5% and a specificity of 69.6% while DD23 yielded a sensitivity of 80.5% and a specificity of 58.7%. In 25 biopsy-confirmed low-grade cancers, DD23 improved cancer detection from 32% to 72% when compared to cytopathology. The DD23 biomarker had a specificity of 85.7% in 35 age-matched normal asymptomatic control specimens. CONCLUSIONS: The DD23 biomarker is an adjuvant test that provides improved detection of bladder cancer in cytology specimens and enhances the sensitivity of the cytopathology diagnosis, especially in low-grade cancers.

Biomarker risk assessment and bladder cancer detection in a cohort exposed to benzidine.

BACKGROUND: Cancer screening with highly sensitive, specific biomarkers that reflect molecular phenotypic alterations is an attractive strategy for cancer control. We examined whether biomarker profiles could be used for risk assessment and cancer detection in a cohort of Chinese workers occupationally exposed to benzidine and at risk for bladder cancer. METHODS: The cohort consisted of 1788 exposed and 373 nonexposed workers, followed from 1991 through 1997. We assayed urothelial cells from voided urine samples for DNA ploidy (expressed as the 5C-exceeding rate [DNA 5CER]), the bladder tumor-associated antigen p300, and a cytoskeletal protein (G-actin). Workers were stratified into different risk groups (high, moderate, and low risk) at each examination based on a predefined biomarker profile. For workers who developed bladder cancer, tumor risk assessment was analyzed from samples collected 6-12 months before the cancer diagnosis. The associations between risk group and subsequent development of bladder cancer were analyzed by Cox proportional hazards regression analysis and logistic analysis, after adjustment. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Twenty-eight bladder cancers were diagnosed in exposed workers and two in nonexposed workers. For risk assessment, DNA 5CER had 87.5% sensitivity, 86.5% specificity, an odds ratio (OR) of 46.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 8.1 to 867.0), and a risk ratio (RR) of 16.2 (95% CI = 7.1 to 37.0); p300 had 50.0% sensitivity, 97.9% specificity, an OR of 40.0 (95% CI = 9.0 to 177.8), and an RR of 37.9 (95% CI = 16.8 to 85.3). The risk of developing bladder cancer was 19.6 (95% CI = 8.0 to 47.9) times higher in workers positive for either the DNA 5CER or p300 biomarkers than in workers negative for both biomarkers and 81.4 (95% CI = 33.3 to 199.3) times higher in workers positive for both biomarkers. G-actin was a poor marker of individual risk. CONCLUSIONS: Occupationally exposed workers at risk for bladder cancer can be individually stratified, screened, monitored, and diagnosed based on predefined molecular biomarker profiles.

Assessment of in vivo effectiveness of tumoricidal chemotherapy and radiation therapy by serial analysis of tumor-associated urinary antigen titers in patients with sarcoma.

Serial measurements of tumor-associated antigens in the urine of patients with sarcoma who received preoperative intra-arterial doxorubicin and radiation therapy were assayed by microcomplement fixation. Changes in urinary antigen titer as a result of therapy were compared to pretreatment samples and were correlated with clinicopathologic evidence of in situ tumor cell destruction. Of the 53 patients with sarcoma studied, 44 had clinicopathologic evidence of tumor destruction induced by the preoperative therapy, and all 44 had a fourfold or greater rise in the level of urinary antigens during the treatment period. The other nine patients had no evidence of tumor destruction and antigen titers remained unchanged. Results suggested that tumoricidal therapy released tumor-associated antigens which could be detected in urine by microcomplement fixation. This phenomenon may be useful for measuring the in vivo effectiveness of tumoricidal therapy on nonaccessible tumors.