PCA3: A new tool to diagnose prostate cancer (PCa) and a guidance in biopsy decisionsTable 1.Characteristics of the population undergone BX or ReBX post PCA3 results.Men with neg biopsy Men with HGPIN/ASAP Men with pos biopsy All evaluable menn = 31 biopsy n = 38 n = 45 n = 114Median mean ± SD Median mean ± SD Median mean ± SD Median mean ± SDnumber (%) number (%) number (%) number (%)within the class within the class within the class within the classAge (yr; n = 31; 38; 45; 114) 68 66.9 ± 6.5 66 66.4 ± 6.4 68 68.5 ± 7.1 68 67.4 ± 6.8At least one previous negative biopsy (%) 12 (38.71%) 8 (21.05%) 11 (24.44%) 31 (27.19%)PSA (ng/ml; n = 31; 36; 45; 112) 7 8 ± 6.4 7.23 8.8 ± 6.2 6.95 9.9 ± 10.4 7 9 ± 8.1Men with serum PSA total< 4 ng/ml-n; (%) 6 (19.35%) 5 (13.16%) 5 (11.11%) 16 (14.04%)4-10 ng/ml-n; (%) 18 (58.06%) 24 (63.16%) 28 (62.22%) 70 (61.4%)> 10 ng/ml-n; (%) 7 (22.58%) 9 (23.68%) 12 (26.67%) 28 (24.56%)Prostate volume (ml; n=7; 12; 8; 27) 58 60 ± 13.9 67 60.3 ± 29 40 40.6 ± 11 57 53.8 ± 23.1Men with suspicious DRE (n; %) 8 (25.81%) 7 (18.42%) 12 (26.67%) 27 (23.68%)PCA3 score 48 54.9 ± 26.2 66 79.6 ± 44.4 97 141.6 ± 120.1 70 97.4 ± 88.5between the groups of patients with negative and positivebiopsy.Statistical analysis showed also that the difference inPCA3 score between negative and ASAP/PIN patients wassignificant (p = 0.00204; two-tailed t-student test) whereasthe difference in PCA3 score between HGPIN/ASAPand positive patients was not significant.The graph in Figure 1 summarizes the relationshipbetween PCA3 score and prostate biopsy results.All the patients who underwent post-PCA3 test biopsyFigure 1.Prostate cancer gene (PCA3) score vs prostate biopsy results. PCA3 score Mean ± SDand median were: 54.9 ± 26.2 and 48 for men with negative biopsy, 79.6 ± 44.4and 66 for men with HGPIN/ASAP biopsy, 141.6 ± 120.1 and 97 for men with PCa biopsy.PCA3 score vs prostate biopsy results (n = 114)(n = 114) were classified in 4 PCA3 score classes as follows:< 35 (n = 9), 35-49 (n = 26), 50-100 (n = 48),> 100 (n = 1). The results are shown in the Table 2. Only9% of patients (4/45) with a positive biopsy were in the< 35 PCA3 score class, whereas 11.1% (5/45) of patientswith a positive biopsy were in the PCA3 score 35-49class, 35.5% (16/45) in the 50-100 PCA3 score class and44.4% (20/45) in the > 100 PCA3 score class. These datademonstrate a direct correlation between the quantitativePCA3 score and the probability of a positive prostatebiopsy. Interestingly, mostpatients (22/38, 57.9%) withdiagnosis of HGPIN/ASAP atbiopsy were concentrated inthe 50-100 PCA3 score class.In conclusion, our resultsindicate that higher PCA3score may be predictive of apositive result in patientsundergoing prostate biopsy.Benign HGPIN/ASAP CaPn = 31 n = 38 n = 45DISCUSSIONIn this study we determinedthe PCA3 score and theserum tPSA in a panel of 915patients and in 114 of themwe correlated them with theresult of prostate biopsy. Ourresults indicated that themean PCA3 score was significantlylower in patientswith negative biopsy than inpatients diagnosed withASAP/PIN at biopsy orArchivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia 2010; 82, 17
F. Galasso, R. Giannella, P. Bruni, R. Giulivo, V. Ricci Barbini, V. Disanto, R. Leonardi, V. Pansadoro, G. SepeTable 2.Biopsies post PCA3 test vs. PCA3 score classes.PCA3 score classes< 35 35-49 50-100 > 100 TotalPCa 4 (8.89)% 5 (11.11)% 16 (35.56)% 20 (44.44)% 45 (100)%HGPIN/ASAP 1 (2.64)% 7 (18.42)% 22 (57.89)% 8 (21.05)% 38 (100)%Neg 4 (12.90)% 14 (45.16)% 10 (32.26)% 3 (9.68)% 31 (100)%Total 9 (7.89)% 26 (22.81)% 48 (42.11)% 31 (27.19)% 114 (100)%Data are expressed as number of biopsies and <strong>per</strong>centage within the biopsies resultspatients with positive biopsy. Previous studies haveshown that PCA3 may have an important role in theidentification of men at risk of developing prostate cancer.This conclusion is supported by previous work thathas suggested the existence of a relation between tumourvolume and PCA3 assay score (14) and that HGPIN isassociated with an increased risk of PCa at repeat biopsy(15). Accordingly, in our study PCA3 score proved to bean effective marker since the probability of a positiverepeat biopsy increases with rising PCA3 scores.Moreover, the finding that mean PCA3 score was higherin patients with HGPIN than in patients without HGPIN,suggest that the PCA3 score may also help in identifyingmen at risk of developing PCa.As these results suggest, PCA3 score represents a powerfultool to measure individual risk to detect PCa andthus help select patients for prostatic evaluation. In factit has been demonstrated that PCA3 score is su<strong>per</strong>ior toserum tPSA in predicting repeat prostate biopsy outcomeand may be indicative of clinical stage of PCa(16). Further prospective studies should evaluatewhether the PCA3 score may be used to monitor menwith chronically elevated PSA levels at regular intervalsfor the development of clinically significant PCa.In the present study the repeat biopsy was positive in39.05% of men, a <strong>per</strong>centage that is similar to previouslyreported data (17).In conclusion, this study confirms the role of PCA3assay as a valid tool for prostate cancer detection and itsrole in making better biopsy decisions. This markerconsents to discriminate patients who have to undergobiopsy from patients who only need be actively surveilled:quantitative PCA3 score correlated with theprobability of a positive result at biopsy. The translationof PCA3 test into routinary clinical use will reduceunnecessary biopsy.ACKNOWLEDGMENTThe authors gratefully acknowledge Dr. Alberto Fienga,who made a major contribution to the study with hisdata analysis and the nurse of Laboratorio diBiadiagnostica Montevergine Malzoni, Mrs. RosalbaRuberto, who fully shared the planning and implementationof the considerable administrative and logisticalprocesses of the study.REFERENCES1. Catalona WJ, et al. Measurement of prostate-specific antigen inserum as a screening test for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 1991;324:1156.2. Loeb S, et al. Pathological characteristics of prostate cancerdetected through prostate specific antigen based screening. J Urol2006; 175:902.3. Stamey TA, et al. Localized prostate cancer. Relationship of tumorvolume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer.Cancer 1993; 71:933.4. Nadler RB, et al. Effect of inflammation and benign prostatichy<strong>per</strong>plasia on elevated serum prostate specific antigen levels. J Urol1995; 154:407-13.5. Sindhwani P, et al. Prostatitis and serum prostate-specific antigen.Curr Urol Rep 2005; 6:307-12.6. Bhanot S, et al. Post-biopsy rise in serum PSA. A potential tool forthe dynamic evaluation of prostate cancer/prostatic intraepithelialneoplasia (PIN). Cancer Biol Ther 2003; 2:67-70.7. Oremek GM, et al. Physical activity release prostate-specific antigen(PSA) form the prostate gland into blood and increases serumPSA concentrations. Clin Chem 1996; 42:691-5.8. Zappa M, et al. Overdiagnosis of prostate carcinoma by screening:an estimated based on the results of the Florence Screening PilotStudy. Ann Oncol 1998; 9: 1297-300.9. Groskopf J, et al. APTIMA PCA3 molecular urine test: developmentof a method to aid in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. ClinChem 2006; 52:1089-95.10. Bussemakers MJG, et al. DD3: A new prostate-specific gene,highly over-expressed in prostate cancer. Cancer Res 1999;59:5975-9.11. Karakiewicz PI, et al. Development and validation of a nomogrampredicting the outcome of prostate biopsy based on patient age,digital rectal examination and serum prostate specific antigen. JUrol 2005; 173:1930-4.12. Walz J, Haese A, Scattoni V, et al. Percent free prostatespecifi-8Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia 2010; 82, 1
- Page 2 and 3: Official Journal of the SIEUN, the
- Page 4 and 5: ContentsHistological evaluation of
- Page 7 and 8: R. Leonardi, R. Caltabiano, S. Lanz
- Page 9 and 10: R. Leonardi, R. Caltabiano, S. Lanz
- Page 11: F. Galasso, R. Giannella, P. Bruni,
- Page 15 and 16: ORIGINAL PAPERSurgery for renal cel
- Page 17 and 18: S.D. Dyakov, G. Lucarelli, A.I. Hin
- Page 19 and 20: S.D. Dyakov, G. Lucarelli, A.I. Hin
- Page 21 and 22: M. Aza, S.S. Iqbal, M.V. Muhammad,
- Page 23 and 24: Archivio Italiano di Urologia e And
- Page 25 and 26: The Clavien classification system t
- Page 27 and 28: PRESENTATIONPercutaneous nephrolith
- Page 29 and 30: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: An ex
- Page 31 and 32: PCNL in ItalyTable 1.Number and hos
- Page 33 and 34: PCNL in ItalyFigure 3.Comparison be
- Page 35 and 36: The patient position for PNL: Does
- Page 37 and 38: PCNL: Tips and tricks in targeting,
- Page 39 and 40: Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithoto
- Page 41 and 42: PRESENTATIONHigh burden and complex
- Page 43 and 44: High burden and complex renal calcu
- Page 45 and 46: PRESENTATIONEndoscopic combined int
- Page 47 and 48: PRESENTATIONHigh burden stones: The
- Page 49 and 50: PRESENTATIONStone treatment in chil
- Page 51 and 52: Stone treatment in children: Where
- Page 53 and 54: PRESENTATIONExtracorporeal shock wa
- Page 55 and 56: PRESENTATIONPercutaneous nephrolith
- Page 57 and 58: PRESENTATIONFlexible ureteroscopy f
- Page 59 and 60: Flexible ureteroscopy for kidney st
- Page 61 and 62: Indications, prediction of success
- Page 63 and 64:
Indications, prediction of success
- Page 65 and 66:
Indications, prediction of success
- Page 67 and 68:
Indications, prediction of success
- Page 69 and 70:
Laparoscopic and open stone surgery
- Page 71 and 72:
Laparoscopic and open stone surgery
- Page 73 and 74:
Laparoscopic and open stone surgery
- Page 75:
Laparoscopic and open stone surgery