Prevention and early detection of prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer is a common malignancy in men and the worldwide burden of this disease is rising. Lifestyle modifications such as smoking cessation, exercise, and weight control offer opportunities to reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Early detection of prostate cancer by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening is controversial, but changes in the PSA threshold, frequency of screening, and the use of other biomarkers have the potential to minimise the overdiagnosis associated with PSA screening. Several new biomarkers for individuals with raised PSA concentrations or those diagnosed with prostate cancer are likely to identify individuals who can be spared aggressive treatment. Several pharmacological agents such as 5α-reductase inhibitors and aspirin could prevent development of prostate cancer. In this Review, we discuss the present evidence and research questions regarding prevention, early detection of prostate cancer, and management of men either at high risk of prostate cancer or diagnosed with low-grade prostate cancer.

Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Screening and New Biomarkers for Prostate Cancer (PCa).

PSA screening reduces PCa-mortality but the disadvantages overdiagnosis and overtreatment require multivariable risk-prediction tools to select appropriate treatment or active surveillance. This review explains the differences between the two largest screening trials and discusses the drawbacks of screening and its meta-analysisxs. The current American and European screening strategies are described. Nonetheless, PSA is one of the most widely used tumor markers and strongly correlates with the risk of harboring PCa. However, while PSA has limitations for PCa detection with its low specificity there are several potential biomarkers presented in this review with utility for PCa currently being studied. There is an urgent need for new biomarkers especially to detect clinically significant and aggressive PCa. From all PSA-based markers, the FDA-approved prostate health index (phi) shows improved specificity over percent free and total PSA. Another kallikrein panel, 4K, which includes KLK2 has recently shown promise in clinical research studies but has not yet undergone formal validation studies. In urine, prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) has also been validated and approved by the FDA for its utility to detect PCa. The potential correlation of PCA3 with cancer aggressiveness requires more clinical studies. The detection of the fusion of androgen-regulated genes with genes of the regulatory transcription factors in tissue of (~)50% of all PCa-patients is a milestone in PCa research. A combination of the urinary assays for TMPRSS2:ERG gene fusion and PCA3 shows an improved accuracy for PCa detection. Overall, the field of PCa biomarker discovery is very exciting and prospective.

Urine TMPRSS2:ERG fusion transcript stratifies prostate cancer risk in men with elevated serum PSA.

More than 1,000,000 men undergo prostate biopsy each year in the United States, most for "elevated" serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Given the lack of specificity and unclear mortality benefit of PSA testing, methods to individualize management of elevated PSA are needed. Greater than 50% of PSA-screened prostate cancers harbor fusions between the transmembrane protease, serine 2 (TMPRSS2) and v-ets erythroblastosis virus E26 oncogene homolog (avian) (ERG) genes. Here, we report a clinical-grade, transcription-mediated amplification assay to risk stratify and detect prostate cancer noninvasively in urine. The TMPRSS2:ERG fusion transcript was quantitatively measured in prospectively collected whole urine from 1312 men at multiple centers. Urine TMPRSS2:ERG was associated with indicators of clinically significant cancer at biopsy and prostatectomy, including tumor size, high Gleason score at prostatectomy, and upgrading of Gleason grade at prostatectomy. TMPRSS2:ERG, in combination with urine prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3), improved the performance of the multivariate Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator in predicting cancer on biopsy. In the biopsy cohorts, men in the highest and lowest of three TMPRSS2:ERG+PCA3 score groups had markedly different rates of cancer, clinically significant cancer by Epstein criteria, and high-grade cancer on biopsy. Our results demonstrate that urine TMPRSS2:ERG, in combination with urine PCA3, enhances the utility of serum PSA for predicting prostate cancer risk and clinically relevant cancer on biopsy.

Prostate cancer gene 3 score predicts prostate biopsy outcome in men receiving dutasteride for prevention of prostate cancer: results from the REDUCE trial.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the ability of the urinary prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) assay to predict biopsy-detected cancers in men receiving dutasteride in the Reduction by Dutasteride of Prostate Cancer Events (REDUCE) study cohort. METHODS: Urine and serum samples from 930 men in the active arm were acquired at years 2 and 4 of the biopsy visits. In addition to univariate logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic analysis, multivariate analysis for association with biopsy outcome was performed for PCA3 score in the presence of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA), age, prostate volume, and family history of prostate cancer. RESULTS: At year 2, the univariate PCA3 score area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.668 versus 0.603 for PSA. At year 4, the PCA3 assay significantly predicted the biopsy outcome (AUC 0.628, 95% confidence interval 0.556-0.700), and the PSA level was not predictive (AUC 0.556, 95% confidence interval 0.469-0.642). The year 2 multivariate model yielded an AUC of 0.712. Removing the PCA3 score decreased the AUC to 0.660 (P = .0166 vs the full model). The median PCA3 scores in the dutasteride arm were not different from those in the 1072 men in the placebo arm (16.2 and 17.2 at year 2, P = .1755; and 18.8 and 18.1 at year 4, P = .2340, respectively). However, the PSA values were reduced >50% in the dutasteride arm at both visits (both P < .0001 vs placebo). At a PCA3 score cutoff of 35, the sensitivity and specificity were equivalent between the 2 arms. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, the PCA3 assay outperformed PSA for cancer detection in men undergoing dutasteride treatment and improved the diagnostic accuracy when combined with the PSA level and other clinical variables. In addition, no adjustment in PCA3 score was needed to yield equivalent clinical performance between the dutasteride and placebo arms. These findings are particularly important in light of the potential role of dutasteride for prostate cancer chemoprevention.

PCA3: from basic molecular science to the clinical lab.

Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in men in the United States. Use of the serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) test to screen men for prostate cancer since the late 1980s has improved the early detection of prostate cancer, however low specificity of the test translates to numerous false positive results and many unnecessary biopsies. New biomarkers to aid in prostate cancer diagnosis are emerging and prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) is one such marker. PCA3 is a noncoding RNA that is highly over-expressed in prostate cancer tissue compared to benign tissue. A non-invasive test for PCA3 was developed using whole urine collected after a digital rectal exam (DRE). Numerous clinical studies have demonstrated the utility of PCA3 for the diagnosis of prostate cancer and some studies suggest that PCA3 may also have prognostic value. The use of PCA3 in combination with serum PSA and other clinical information enhances the diagnostic accuracy of prostate cancer detection and will enable physicians to make more informed decisions with patients at risk for prostate cancer.

PCA3 molecular urine test for predicting repeat prostate biopsy outcome in populations at risk: validation in the placebo arm of the dutasteride REDUCE trial.

PURPOSE: We determined the performance of PCA3 alone and in the presence of other covariates as an indicator of contemporaneous and future prostate biopsy results in a population with previous negative biopsy and increased serum prostate specific antigen. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Urine PCA3 scores were determined before year 2 and year 4 biopsies from patients in the placebo arm of the REDUCE trial, a prostate cancer risk reduction study evaluating men with moderately increased serum prostate specific antigen results and negative biopsy at baseline. PCA3, serum prostate specific antigen and percent free prostate specific antigen results were correlated with biopsy outcome via univariate logistic regression and ROC analyses. Multivariate logistic regression was also performed including these biomarkers together with prostate volume, age and family history. RESULTS: PCA3 scores were measurable from 1,072 of 1,140 subjects (94% informative rate). PCA3 scores were associated with positive biopsy rate (p <0.0001) and correlated with biopsy Gleason score (p = 0.0017). PCA3 AUC of 0.693 was greater than serum prostate specific antigen (0.612, p = 0.0077 vs PCA3). The multivariate logistic regression model yielded an AUC of 0.753 and exclusion of PCA3 from the model decreased AUC to 0.717 (p = 0.0009). PCA3 at year 2 was a significant predictor of year 4 biopsy outcome (AUC 0.634, p = 0.0002), whereas serum prostate specific antigen and free prostate specific antigen were not predictive (p = 0.3281 and 0.6782, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: PCA3 clinical performance was validated in the largest repeat biopsy study to date. Increased PCA3 scores indicated increased risk of contemporaneous cancers and predicted future biopsy outcomes. Use of PCA3 in combination with serum prostate specific antigen and other risk factors significantly increased diagnostic accuracy.

Molecular assays for the detection of prostate tumor derived nucleic acids in peripheral blood.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer mortality in American men. Although serum PSA testing is widely used for early detection, more specific prognostic tests are needed to guide treatment decisions. Recently, the enumeration of circulating prostate epithelial cells has been shown to correlate with disease recurrence and metastasis following definitive treatment. The purpose of our study was to investigate an immunomagnetic fractionation procedure to enrich circulating prostate tumor cells (CTCs) from peripheral blood specimens, and to apply amplified molecular assays for the detection of prostate-specific markers (PSA, PCA3 and TMPRSS2:ERG gene fusion mRNAs). RESULTS: As few as five prostate cancer cells were detected per 5 mL of whole blood in model system experiments using anti-EpCAM magnetic particles alone or in combination with anti-PSMA magnetic particles. In our experiments, anti-EpCAM magnetic particles alone exhibited equivalent or better analytical performance with patient samples compared to a combination of anti-EpCAM + anti-PSMA magnetic particles. Up to 39% of men with advanced prostate cancer tested positive with one or more of the molecular assays tested, whereas control samples from men with benign prostate hyperplasia gave consistently negative results as expected. Interestingly, for the vast majority of men who tested positive for PSA mRNA following CTC enrichment, their matched plasma samples also tested positive, although CTC enrichment gave higher overall mRNA copy numbers. CONCLUSION: CTCs were successfully enriched and detected in men with advanced prostate cancer using an immunomagnetic enrichment procedure coupled with amplified molecular assays for PSA, PCA3, and TMPRSS2:ERG gene fusion mRNAs. Our results indicate that men who test positive following CTC enrichment also exhibit higher detectable levels of non-cellular, circulating prostate-specific mRNAs.

Evaluation of the ETS-related gene mRNA in urine for the detection of prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Prevalent gene fusions in prostate cancer involve androgen-regulated promoters (primarily TMPRSS2) and ETS transcription factors (predominantly ETS-regulated gene (ERG)], which result in tumor selective overexpression of ERG in two thirds of patients. Because diverse genomic fusion events lead to ERG overexpression in prostate cancer, we reasoned that it may be more practical to capture such alterations using an assay targeting ERG sequences retained in such gene fusions. This study evaluates the potential of an assay quantitating ERG mRNA in post-digital rectal exam (DRE) urine for improving prostate cancer detection. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients scheduled to undergo transrectal ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the prostate were prospectively enrolled. On the day of biopsy, patients provided a urine sample immediately following a DRE. Urine ERG mRNA was measured and normalized to urine prostate-specific antigen (PSA) mRNA using the DTS 400 system. Demographic traits, clinical characteristics and biopsy results were analyzed for association with urine ERG score. RESULTS: The study was conducted on 237 patients. Prostate cancer was shown on biopsy in 40.9% of study subjects. A higher urine ERG score associated significantly with malignancy on biopsy (P = 0.0145), but not with clinical stage or Gleason score. Urine ERG score performed best in Caucasians and in men with a PSA of

New markers and multivariate models for prostate cancer detection.

Specificity of PSA has been enhanced by using molecular forms of PSA and free PSA (fPSA) such as percent free PSA (% fPSA), proPSA, intact PSA or BPHA and/or new serum markers. Most of these promising new serum markers like EPCA2 or ANXA3 still lack confirmation of outstanding initial results or show only marginal enhanced specificity at high sensitivity levels. PCA3, TMPRSS2-ERG, and other analytes in urine collected after digital rectal examination with application of mild digital pressure have potential to preferentially detect aggressive PCa and to decrease the rate of unnecessary repeat biopsies. The combination of these new urinary markers with new and established serum markers seems to be most promising to further increase specificity of tPSA. Multivariate models e.g. artificial neural networks (ANN) or logistic regression (LR)-based nomograms have been recently developed by incorporating these new markers in several studies. There is generally an advantage to including new markers and clinical data as additional parameters to PSA and % fPSA within ANN and LR models. The results and unexpected pitfalls of these studies are shown.

National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry laboratory medicine practice guidelines for use of tumor markers in testicular, prostate, colorectal, breast, and ovarian cancers.

BACKGROUND: Updated National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry (NACB) Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines for the use of tumor markers in the clinic have been developed. METHODS: Published reports relevant to use of tumor markers for 5 cancer sites--testicular, prostate, colorectal, breast, and ovarian--were critically reviewed. RESULTS: For testicular cancer, alpha-fetoprotein, human chorionic gonadotropin, and lactate dehydrogenase are recommended for diagnosis/case finding, staging, prognosis determination, recurrence detection, and therapy monitoring. alpha-Fetoprotein is also recommended for differential diagnosis of nonseminomatous and seminomatous germ cell tumors. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is not recommended for prostate cancer screening, but may be used for detecting disease recurrence and monitoring therapy. Free PSA measurement data are useful for distinguishing malignant from benign prostatic disease when total PSA is <10 microg/L. In colorectal cancer, carcinoembryonic antigen is recommended (with some caveats) for prognosis determination, postoperative surveillance, and therapy monitoring in advanced disease. Fecal occult blood testing may be used for screening asymptomatic adults 50 years or older. For breast cancer, estrogen and progesterone receptors are mandatory for predicting response to hormone therapy, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 measurement is mandatory for predicting response to trastuzumab, and urokinase plasminogen activator/plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 may be used for determining prognosis in lymph node-negative patients. CA15-3/BR27-29 or carcinoembryonic antigen may be used for therapy monitoring in advanced disease. CA125 is recommended (with transvaginal ultrasound) for early detection of ovarian cancer in women at high risk for this disease. CA125 is also recommended for differential diagnosis of suspicious pelvic masses in postmenopausal women, as well as for detection of recurrence, monitoring of therapy, and determination of prognosis in women with ovarian cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of these recommendations should encourage optimal use of tumor markers.

PCA3 score before radical prostatectomy predicts extracapsular extension and tumor volume.

PURPOSE: PCA3 is a prostate specific, nonprotein coding RNA that is over expressed in prostate cancer. Recent studies showed the diagnostic potential of a urine based PCA3 for predicting biopsy outcome. We assessed the relationship between urine PCA3 and pathological features in whole mount radical prostatectomy specimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Post-digital rectal examination urine specimens were obtained from 72 men with prostate cancer before radical prostatectomy. PCA3 and PSA mRNA were measured. The ratio of PCA3 to PSA mRNA was recorded as a PCA3 score and correlated with data on each prostate specimen. RESULTS: Patients with extracapsular extension had a significantly higher median PCA3 score than patients without extracapsular extension (48.8 vs 18.7, p = 0.02). PCA3 score significantly correlated with total tumor volume (r = 0.38, p <0.01). On multivariate analysis PCA3 score was an independent predictor of extracapsular extension (p = 0.01) and total tumor volume less than 0.5 cc (p = 0.04). At a cutoff PCA3 score of 47 extracapsular extension was predicted with 94% specificity and an 80% positive predictive value. When combined with serum PSA and biopsy Gleason score, the ROC AUC for predicting extracapsular extension was 0.90. CONCLUSIONS: PCA3 detected in the post-digital rectal examination urine of patients with prostate cancer correlated with pathological findings. Therefore, it could provide prognostic information. To our knowledge this is the first report of a molecular urine assay that predicts extracapsular extension.

Predicting prostate cancer risk through incorporation of prostate cancer gene 3.

PURPOSE: The online Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator combines prostate specific antigen, digital rectal examination, family and biopsy history, age and race to determine the risk of prostate cancer. In this report we incorporate the biomarker prostate cancer gene 3 into the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Methodology was developed to incorporate new markers for prostate cancer into the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator based on likelihood ratios calculated from separate case control or cohort studies. The methodology was applied to incorporate the marker prostate cancer gene 3 into the risk calculator based on a cohort of 521 men who underwent prostate biopsy with measurements of urinary prostate cancer gene 3, serum prostate specific antigen, digital rectal examination and biopsy history. External validation of the updated risk calculator was performed on a cohort of 443 European patients, and compared to Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risks, prostate specific antigen and prostate cancer gene 3 by area underneath the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: The AUC of posterior risks (AUC 0.696, 95% CI 0.641-0.750) was higher than that of prostate specific antigen (AUC 0.607, 95% CI 0.546-0.668, p = 0.001) and Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risks (AUC 0.653, 95% CI 0.593-0.714, p <0.05). Although it was higher it was not statistically significantly different from that of prostate cancer gene 3 (AUC 0.665, 95% CI 0.610-0.721, p >0.05). Sensitivities of posterior risks were higher than those of prostate cancer gene 3, prostate specific antigen and Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risks. CONCLUSIONS: New markers for prostate cancer can be incorporated into the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator by a novel approach. Incorporation of prostate cancer gene 3 improved the diagnostic accuracy of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator.

Detailed analysis of histopathological parameters in radical prostatectomy specimens and PCA3 urine test results.

BACKGROUND: Due to the drawbacks of serum prostate-specific antigen, there is an ongoing search for new diagnostic and prognostic prostate cancer (PCa) markers. PCA3 has proven to be of value in the diagnosis of PCa. However, so far few attempts have been made to investigate the prognostic value of PCA3. Our objective was to further investigate the prognostic value of PCA3. METHODS: In this study we correlated the PCA3 score in urinary sediments after digital rectal examination in 62 men with the classical prognostic parameters assessed in radical prostatectomy specimens (i.e. Gleason score, pathological tumor stage and total tumor volume) and moreover, with the expression of three immunohistochemical markers for PCa biological aggressiveness (i.e. E-cadherin, alpha-catenin and EZH2). The results from this study serve as a reflection on and a valuable adjunct to recently published results. RESULTS: We did not find a significant correlation of the PCA3 score with the classical prognostic parameters assessed in radical prostatectomy specimens or the expression of the immunohistochemical markers for PCa biological aggressiveness. However, we did observe a trend for a higher PCA3 score in significant PCa versus insignificant PCa, aberrant E-cadherin staining versus normal E-cadherin staining and increased EZH2 staining versus normal EZH2 staining. CONCLUSIONS: In this study we could not prove the prognostic value of PCA3. Further research with large numbers of men and adequate follow-up is needed to provide a definitive answer to the question if PCA3 is not only a diagnostic but also a prognostic PCa marker.

PCA3 molecular urine assay correlates with prostate cancer tumor volume: implication in selecting candidates for active surveillance.

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) has shown promise as a molecular marker in prostate cancer detection. We assessed the association of urinary PCA3 score with prostatectomy tumor volume and other clinical and pathological features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Urine specimens were collected after digital rectal examination from 59 men scheduled for prostate biopsy and 83 men scheduled for radical prostatectomy. Prostatectomy findings were evaluable for 96 men. PCA3 and prostate specific antigen mRNAs were quantified with Gen-Probe DTS 400 System. The PCA3 score was defined as the ratio of PCA3 mRNA/prostate specific antigen mRNA x10(3). RESULTS: The PCA3 score in men with negative biopsies (30) and positive biopsies (29) were significantly different (median 21.1 and 31.0, respectively, p = 0.029). The PCA3 score was significantly correlated with total tumor volume in prostatectomy specimens (r = 0.269, p = 0.008), and was also associated with prostatectomy Gleason score (6 vs 7 or greater, p = 0.005) but not with other clinical and pathological features. The PCA3 score was significantly different when comparing low volume/low grade cancer (dominant tumor volume less than 0.5 cc, Gleason score 6) and significant cancer (p = 0.007). On multivariate analysis PCA3 was the best predictor of total tumor volume in prostatectomy (p = 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that the PCA3 score could discriminate low volume cancer (total tumor volume less than 0.5 cc) well with area under the curve of 0.757. CONCLUSIONS: The PCA3 score appears to stratify men based on prostatectomy tumor volume and Gleason score, and may have clinical applicability in selecting men who have low volume/low grade cancer.

PCA3: a molecular urine assay for predicting prostate biopsy outcome.

PURPOSE: A urinary assay for PCA3, an mRNA that is highly over expressed in prostate cancer cells, has shown usefulness as a diagnostic test for this common malignancy. We further characterized PCA3 performance in different groups of men and determined whether the PCA3 score could synergize with other clinical information to predict biopsy outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospectively urine was collected following standardized digital rectal examination in 570 men immediately before prostate biopsy. Urinary PCA3 mRNA levels were quantified and then normalized to the amount of prostate derived RNA to generate a PCA3 score. RESULTS: The percent of biopsy positive men identified increased directly with the PCA3 score. PCA3 assay performance was equivalent in the first vs previous negative biopsy groups with an area under the ROC curve of 0.70 and 0.68, respectively. Unlike serum prostate specific antigen the PCA3 score did not increase with prostate volume. PCA3 assay sensitivity and specificity were equivalent at serum prostate specific antigen less than 4, 4 to 10 and more than 10 ng/ml. A logistic regression algorithm using PCA3, serum prostate specific antigen, prostate volume and digital rectal examination result increased the AUC from 0.69 for PCA3 alone to 0.75 (p = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: PCA3 is independent of prostate volume, serum prostate specific antigen level and the number of prior biopsies. The quantitative PCA3 score correlated with the probability of positive biopsy. Logistic regression results suggest that the PCA3 score could be incorporated into a nomogram for improved prediction of biopsy outcome. The results of this study provide further evidence that PCA3 is a useful adjunct to current methods for prostate cancer diagnosis.

A multicenter evaluation of the PCA3 molecular urine test: pre-analytical effects, analytical performance, and diagnostic accuracy.

BACKGROUND: Measurement of prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) mRNA normalized to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) mRNA in urine has been proposed as a marker for prostate cancer. METHODS: We investigated pre-analytical effects, analytical performance, and diagnostic accuracy of a quantitative assay for PCA3. RESULTS: Urine specimens collected without prostate manipulation demonstrated low informative rates. However, specimens collected following digital rectal examinations of 3 or 8 strokes per prostate lobe demonstrated informative rates >94%. Across all urine specimen types, median PCA3 results did not show statistically significant differences (P>0.8). Measurements of controls of known mRNA content demonstrated percent recoveries of 100+/-15% for both PCA3 and PSA mRNAs. PCA3 mRNA total, intra-assay, inter-assay, and inter-site CVs were < or =17.1%, < or =14.0%, < or =9.9%, and < or =3.2%, respectively. Corresponding CVs for PSA mRNA assay were < or =11.5%, < or =8.6%, < or =7.9%, and < or =8.3%. Blinded assay of urines from 72 men with known prostate biopsy outcomes yielded areas under the curve from receiver-operating characteristic analysis of 0.7 at both research sites. Deming regression of individual PCA3 results between sites yielded slope=0.94, intercept=0.48, R=0.9677 (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The PCA3 assay is insensitive to pre-analytical factors, performs well analytically and correctly classifies a high percent of subjects with known prostate cancer status across research sites.

Twenty Years of PSA: From Prostate Antigen to Tumor Marker.

The measurement of prostate-specific antigen in serum is credited with dramatic advances in the early detection of men with prostatic carcinoma. This report summarizes the history of biochemical research and the current understanding and application of prostate-specific antigen in prostate cancer diagnostics.

Molecular PCA3 diagnostics on prostatic fluid.

BACKGROUND: The PCA3 test on urine can improve specificity in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis and could prevent unnecessary prostate biopsies. In this study, we evaluated the PCA3 test on prostatic fluid and compared this with the PCA3 test on urine in a clinical research setting. METHODS: Prostatic fluid and urine samples from 67 men were collected following digital rectal examination (DRE). The sediments were analyzed using the quantitative APTIMA PCA3 test. The results were compared with prostate biopsy results. RESULTS: Using a PCA3 score of 66 as a cut-off value, the test on prostatic fluid had 65% sensitivity for the detection of PCa, 82% specificity and a negative predictive value of 82%. At a cut-off value of 43, the test on urine had 61% sensitivity, 80% specificity and a negative predictive value of 80%. CONCLUSIONS: The PCA3 test can be performed on both urine and prostatic fluid in the diagnosis of PCa with comparable results.

PCA3 molecular urine assay for prostate cancer in men undergoing repeat biopsy.

OBJECTIVES: Men with elevated serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and negative prostate biopsy findings present a dilemma because of the lack of an accurate diagnostic test. We evaluated the potential utility of the investigational prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) urine assay to predict the repeat biopsy outcome. METHODS: Urine was collected after digital rectal examination (three strokes per lobe) from 233 men with serum PSA levels persistently 2.5 ng/mL or greater and at least one previous negative biopsy. The specimens were collected from April 2004 to January 2006. The PCA3 scores were determined using a highly sensitive quantitative assay with transcription-mediated amplification. The ability of the PCA3 score to predict the biopsy outcome was assessed and compared with the serum PSA levels. RESULTS: The RNA yield was adequate for analysis in the urine samples from 226 of 233 men (ie, the informative specimen rate was 97%). Repeat biopsy revealed prostate cancer in 60 (27%) of the of 226 remaining subjects. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis yielded an area under the curve of 0.68 for the PCA3 score. In contrast, the area under the curve for serum PSA was 0.52. Using a PCA3 score cutoff of 35, the assay sensitivity was 58% and specificity 72%, with an odds ratio of 3.6. At PCA3 scores of less than 5, only 12% of men had prostate cancer on repeat biopsy; at PCA3 scores greater than 100, the risk of positive biopsy was 50%. CONCLUSIONS: In men undergoing repeat prostate biopsy to rule out cancer, the urinary PCA3 score was superior to serum PSA determination for predicting the biopsy outcome. The high specificity and informative rate suggest that the PCA3 assay could have an important role in prostate cancer diagnosis.