The prostate health index PHI predicts oncological outcome and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy - analysis in 437 patients.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the Prostate-Health-Index (PHI) for pathological outcome prediction following radical prostatectomy and also for biochemical recurrence prediction in comparison to established parameters such as Gleason-score, pathological tumor stage, resection status (R0/1) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Out of a cohort of 460 cases with preoperative PHI-measurements (World Health Organization calibration: Beckman Coulter Access-2-Immunoassay) between 2001 and 2014, 437 patients with complete follow up data were included. From these 437 patients, 87 (19.9%) developed a biochemical recurrence. Patient characteristics were compared by using chi-square test. Predictors were analyzed by multivariate adjusted logistic and Cox regression. The median follow up for a biochemical recurrence was 65 (range 3-161) months. PHI, PSA, [-2]proPSA, PHI- and PSA-density performed as significant variables (p < 0.05) for cancer aggressiveness: Gleason-score <7 or ≥7 (ISUP grade 1 or ≥2) . Concerning pathological tumor stage discrimination and prediction, variables as PHI, PSA, %fPSA, [-2]proPSA, PHI- and PSA-density significantly discriminated between stages

Serum Vitamin D is Not Helpful for Predicting Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness Compared with the Prostate Health Index.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the usefulness of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D as a marker of aggressive prostate cancer and for active surveillance compared to PHI (Prostate Health Index). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 480 prospectively biopsied men 222 had prostate cancer and 258 had no evidence of malignancy. In all men prostate specific antigen was less than 20 ng/ml. We measured 25-hydroxyvitamin D, prostate specific antigen, free prostate specific antigen and -2proPSA using a commercially available immunoassay system. PHI was calculated according to the equation, -2proPSA/free prostate specific antigen × âˆšPSA. We determined 25-hydroxyvitamin D using a 2-step competitive binding immunoenzymatic vitamin D assay. RESULTS: The 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations were not associated with Gleason grade according to the 2014 ISUP (International Society of Urological Pathology) consensus conference Gleason grading system. PHI values were higher with increasing Gleason grade. Median 25-hydroxyvitamin D did not differ between men with prostate cancer vs no evidence of malignancy (50.6 vs 48.2 nmol/l, p = 0.192) or in ISUP Gleason subgroups despite seasonal variations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D. However, PHI values significantly differed between the subgroup with no evidence of malignancy and all Gleason subgroups (p <0.0001). The ROCs of all men revealed an advantage of PHI over 25-hydroxyvitamin D (AUC 0.78 vs 0.535, p <0.0001). PHI could also significantly better separate patients with no evidence of malignancy from those with nonaggressive disease (ISUP Gleason grade 1) from those with aggressive prostate cancer (ISUP Gleason grades 2-5). CONCLUSIONS: It remains highly improbable that 25-hydroxyvitamin D could be used as decision or selection marker for aggressive prostate cancer or for active surveillance compared to accepted markers, as recently suggested.