PCA3 como biomarcador de segunda línea en un programa de screening oportunista prospectivo, aleatorizado y controlado / PCA3 as a second-line biomarker in a prospective controlled randomized opportunistic prostate cancer screening programme

Objetivos: Determinar el comportamiento del PCA3 como un marcador de segunda línea en un programa de cribado oportunista de cáncer de próstata (CaP) y su comparación con la calculadora de riesgo 3 del cribado aleatorizado europeo en cáncer de próstata (ERSPC RC-3). Material y métodos: En total de 5.199 hombres de 40-75 años se hicieron la prueba del antígeno prostático específico (PSA) y un tacto rectal (TR). Aquellos con TR normal y PSA ≥ 3ng/ml se realizaron un PCA3. Todos los hombres con PCA3 ≥ 35 se hicieron biopsia inicial (BxI) -12 cilindros-. Aquellos con PCA3 < 35 se aleatorizaron 1:1 a BxI u observación. Los resultados se comparan con los obtenidos con la aplicación de la calculadora ERSPC RC-3. Resultados: PCA3 se testó en 838 hombres (16,1%). En los grupos PCA3(+) y PCA3(-), las tasas de detección global de CaP fueron del 40,9 y del 14,7% a una mediana de seguimiento de 21,7 meses (p < 0,001. En el grupo PCA3(+) (n = 301, 35,9%), se identificó CaP en 115 hombres en BxI (38,2%). En el brazo aleatorizado, 256 se hicieron BxI y se objetivó CaP en 46 (18,0%) (p < 0,001). La potencial tasa de ahorro de biopsias siguiendo el corte PCA3 = 35 hubiera sido de 64,1% frente a la de 76,6% si hubiéramos usado ERSPC RC-3. Sin embargo, la tasa estimada de falsos negativos de CaP de alto grado (CaPAG = Gleason ≥ 7) se hubiera reducido un 37,1% (de 89 a 56 pacientes) al usar el PCA3. Si hubiéramos usado el corte 35 de PCA3 para no realizar BxI, hubiésemos dejado de diagnosticar un 14,7% de CaP y un 9,1% de CaP clínicamente significativo, a un seguimiento medio aproximado de 2 años. Conclusiones: Cuando se usa PCA3-35 como biomarcador de segunda línea en hombres con PSA ≥ 3ng/ml y TR normal, se puede obviar la BxI un 12,5% menos que usando la ERSPC RC-3, pero reduciendo los falsos negativos un 36,2%. A un seguimiento de 21,7 meses, este protocolo dual no hubiera detectado un 9,1% de CaP clínicamente significativo, por lo que el seguimiento con estrictos criterios de biopsia basados en PSA y TR es obligatorio en casos con PCA3 < 35

Objectives: PCA3 performance as a single second line biomarker is compared to the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculator model 3 (ERSPC RC-3) in an opportunistic screening in prostate cancer (PCa). Material and methods: 5,199 men, aged 40-75y, underwent prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and digital rectal examination (DRE). Men with a normal DRE and PSA ≥3ng/ml had a PCA3 test done. All men with PCA3 ≥ 35 underwent an initial biopsy (IBx) -12 cores-. Men with PCA3 < 35 were randomized 1:1 to either IBx or observation. We compared them to those obtained with ERSPC RC-3. Results: PCA3 test was performed on 838 men (16.1%). In PCA3(+) and PCA3(-) groups, global PCa detection rates were 40.9% and 14.7% with a median follow-up (FU) of 21.7 months (P <.001). In the PCA3(+) arm (n = 301, 35.9%), PCa was identified in 115 men at IBx (38.2%). In the randomized arm, 256 underwent IBx and PCa was found in 46 (18.0%) (P < .001). The biopsy-sparing potential would have been 64.1% as opposed to 76.6% if we had used ERSPC RC-3. However, the estimated false negative cases for HGPCa would have been reduced by 37.1% (89 to 56 patients). Moreover, if we had applied PCA3-35 to avoid IBx, 14.7% PCa and 9.1% of clinical significant PCa patients would not have been diagnosed during this FU. Conclusions: When PCA3-35 is used as a second-line biomarker when PSA ≥ 3ng/ml and DRE is normal, IBx could be avoided in 12.5% less than if ERSPC RC-3 is used and would reduce the false negative cases by 36.2%. At a FU of 21.7 months, this dual protocol would miss 9.1% of clinically significant PCa, so strict FU is mandatory with established biopsy criteria based on PSA and DRE in cases with PCA3 < 35

PCA3 as a second-line biomarker in a prospective controlled randomized opportunistic prostate cancer screening programme. / PCA3 como biomarcador de segunda línea en un programa de screening oportunista prospectivo, aleatorizado y controlado.

OBJECTIVES: PCA3 performance as a single second line biomarker is compared to the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculator model 3 (ERSPC RC-3) in an opportunistic screening in prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIAL AND METHODS: 5,199 men, aged 40-75y, underwent prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and digital rectal examination (DRE). Men with a normal DRE and PSA ≥3ng/ml had a PCA3 test done. All men with PCA3 ≥35 underwent an initial biopsy (IBx) -12 cores-. Men with PCA3 <35 were randomized 1:1 to either IBx or observation. We compared them to those obtained with ERSPC RC-3. RESULTS: PCA3 test was performed on 838 men (16.1%). In PCA3(+) and PCA3(-) groups, global PCa detection rates were 40.9% and 14.7% with a median follow-up (FU) of 21.7 months (P<.001). In the PCA3(+) arm (n=301, 35.9%), PCa was identified in 115 men at IBx (38.2%). In the randomized arm, 256 underwent IBx and PCa was found in 46 (18.0%) (P<.001). The biopsy-sparing potential would have been 64.1% as opposed to 76.6% if we had used ERSPC RC-3. However, the estimated false negative cases for HGPCa would have been reduced by 37.1% (89 to 56 patients). Moreover, if we had applied PCA3-35 to avoid IBx, 14.7% PCa and 9.1% of clinical significant PCa patients would not have been diagnosed during this FU. CONCLUSIONS: When PCA3-35 is used as a second-line biomarker when PSA ≥3ng/ml and DRE is normal, IBx could be avoided in 12.5% less than if ERSPC RC-3 is used and would reduce the false negative cases by 36.2%. At a FU of 21.7 months, this dual protocol would miss 9.1% of clinically significant PCa, so strict FU is mandatory with established biopsy criteria based on PSA and DRE in cases with PCA3 <35.

Serum levels of zinc and copper in patients with Parkinson's disease.

Several recent studies have shown decreased copper and increased zinc concentrations in the substantia nigra and increased copper concentrations in the cerebrospinal fluid of Parkinson's disease patients. To elucidate whether changes in serum levels of these trace elements may increase the risk of developing Parkinson's disease (PD), we assessed serum levels of zinc and copper by flame atomic absorption spectrophotometry, and albumin and ceruloplasmin, in 32 (Zn) and 39 PD patients (Cu), respectively, with their spouses as the control group. Serum zinc, albumin, copper and ceruloplasmin levels and the zinc/albumin and copper/ceruloplasmin ratios, did not differ significantly between the two groups and were not influenced by antiparkinsonian therapy in the PD patients. Serum zinc/albumin ratio (r = 0.43), ceruloplasmin (r = -0.36) and copper/ceruloplasmin ratio (r = 0.36) correlated significantly with age, but not with age of onset, duration of the disease, scores of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale and Hoehn and Yahr staging in PD patients. These values did not correlate with age in the control group. These results suggest that serum levels of zinc and copper do not play any role as risk factors for PD.