Limitations of Prostate Biopsy in Detection of Cribriform and Intraductal Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The presence of cribriform morphology and intraductal carcinoma (IDC) in prostate biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens is an adverse prognostic feature that can be used to guide treatment decisions. OBJECTIVE: To assess how accurately biopsies can detect cribriform morphology and IDC cancer by examining matched biopsy and prostatectomy samples. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients who underwent radical prostatectomy at The Princess Margaret Cancer Centre between January 2015 and December 2022 and had cribriform morphology and/or IDC in the surgical specimen were included in the study. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We used detection sensitivity to evaluate the level of agreement between biopsy and prostatectomy samples regarding the presence of cribriform morphology and IDC. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of the 287 men who underwent radical prostatectomy, 241 (84%) had cribriform morphology and 161 (56%) had IDC on final pathology. The sensitivity of prostate biopsy, using radical prostatectomy as the reference, was 42.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 36-49%) for detection of cribriform morphology and 44.1% (95% CI 36-52%) for detection of IDC. The sensitivity of prostate biopsy for detection of either IDC or cribriform morphology was 52.5% (95% CI 47-58%). Among patients who underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies, the sensitivity was 54% (95% CI 39-68%) for detection of cribriform morphology and 37% (95% CI 19-58%) for detection of IDC. CONCLUSIONS: Biopsy has low sensitivity for detecting cribriform morphology and IDC. These limitations should be incorporated into clinical decision-making. Biomarkers for better detection of these histological patterns are needed. PATIENT SUMMARY: Prostate biopsy is not an accurate method for detecting two specific types of prostate cancer cells, called cribriform pattern and intraductal prostate cancer, which are associated with unfavorable prognosis.

The Percentage of [-2]Pro-Prostate-Specific Antigen and the Prostate Health Index Outperform Prostate-Specific Antigen and the Percentage of Free Prostate-Specific Antigen in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer and Can Be Used as Reflex Tests.

CONTEXT.­: There is a need to avoid the overdiagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) and to find more specific biomarkers. OBJECTIVE.­: To evaluate the clinical utility of [-2]pro-prostate-specific antigen ([-2]proPSA) derivatives in detecting clinically significant PCa (csPCa) and to compare it with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and with the percentage of free PSA (%fPSA). DESIGN.­: Two hundred thirty-seven men (PSA: 2-10 ng/mL) scheduled for a prostate biopsy were enrolled. Parametric and nonparametric tests, receiver operating characteristic curves, and logistic regression analysis were applied. Outcomes were csPCa and overall PCa. RESULTS.­: Both [-2]proPSA derivatives were significantly higher in csPCa and overall PCa (P < .001). The areas under the curves for the prediction of csPCa were higher for the percentage of [-2]proPSA (%[-2]proPSA) (0.781) and the prostate health index (PHI) (0.814) than for PSA (0.651) and %fPSA (0.724). There was a gain of 11% in diagnostic accuracy when %[-2]proPSA or PHI were added to a base model with PSA and %fPSA. Twenty-five percent to 29% of biopsies could have been spared with %[-2]proPSA (cutoff: ≥1.25%) and PHI (cutoff: ≥27), missing 10% of csPCas. The same results could have been achieved by using [-2]proPSA as a reflex test, when %fPSA was 25% or less (cutoffs: ≥1.12% and ≥24 for %[-2]proPSA and PHI, respectively). CONCLUSIONS.­: The [-2]proPSA derivatives improve the diagnostic accuracy of csPCa when the PSA value is between 2 and 10 ng/mL, sparing unnecessary biopsies and selecting patients for active surveillance. [-2]proPSA can be used as a reflex test when %fPSA is 25% or less, without reducing the diagnostic accuracy for csPCa and the number of spared biopsies.

Tumour markers in prostate cancer: The post-prostate-specific antigen era.

Although prostate-specific antigen-based prostate cancer screening had a positive impact in reducing prostate cancer mortality, it also led to overdiagnosis, overtreatment and a significant number of unnecessary biopsies. In the post-prostate-specific antigen era, new biomarkers have emerged that can complement the information given by prostate-specific antigen, towards a better cancer diagnostic specificity, and also allowing a better estimate of the aggressiveness of the disease and its clinical outcome. That means those markers have the potential to assist the clinician in the decision-making processes, such as whether or not to perform a biopsy, and to make the best treatment choice among the new therapeutic options available, including active surveillance in lower risk disease. In this article, we will review several of those more recent diagnostic markers (4Kscore®, [-2]proPSA and Prostate Health Index, SelectMDx®, ConfirmMDx®, Progensa® Prostate Cancer Antigen 3, Mi-Prostate Score, ExoDx™ Prostate Test, the Stockholm3 test and ERSPC risk calculators) and prognostic markers (OncotypeDX® Genomic Prostate Score, Prolaris®, Decipher® and ProMark®). We will also address some new liquid biopsy approaches - circulating tumour cells and cell-free DNA - with a potential role in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and will briefly give some future perspectives, mostly outlooking epigenetic markers.