Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · J Lab Physicians 2023; 15(02): 237-242
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1757723
Original Article

Utility of Prostate-Specific Antigen Isoforms and Prostate Health Index in the Diagnosis of Metastatic Prostate Cancer

Govinda Nanjaiah Laxmana Raju
1   Biochemistry Section, Laboratory Services, Apollo Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
2   Department of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, Annamalai University, Annamalainagar, Tamil Nadu, India
,
Parineetha P. Bhat 
3   Department of Biochemistry, St. Peter's Medical College, Hospital and Research Institute, Krishnagiri, Tamil Nadu, India
,
Siddavaram Nagini
2   Department of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, Annamalai University, Annamalainagar, Tamil Nadu, India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The current study was undertaken to investigate the utility of total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA), its isoform [-2] proPSA (p2PSA), and prostate health index (PHI) in the diagnosis of metastatic prostate cancer (PCa).

Materials and Methods This study was conducted from March 2016 to May 2019. Eighty-five subjects who were diagnosed with PCa for the first time, following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy, were included in the study. The prebiopsy blood samples were analyzed in Beckman Coulter Access-2 Immunoanalyzer for tPSA, p2PSA, and free PSA (fPSA), and the calculated parameters included %p2PSA, %fPSA, and PHI. Mann–Whitney's U test was used as test of significance, and p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results Of the 85 participants, 81.2% (n = 69) had evidence of metastasis, both clinically and pathologically. The median tPSA (ng/mL), p2PSA (pg/mL), %p2PSA, and PHI were significantly higher in the group with evidence of metastasis (46.5 vs. 13.76; 198.0 vs. 35.72; 3.25 vs. 1.51; 237.58 vs. 59.74, respectively). The sensitivity (%), specificity (%), negative predictive value (%), and positive predictive value (%) to diagnose metastatic PCa of tPSA at a cutoff of 20 ng/mL, PHI at a cutoff of 55, and %p2PSA at a cutoff of 1.66 were 92.7, 98.5, and 94.2; 37.5, 43.7, and 62.5; 54.5, 87.5, and 71.4; and 86.4, 88.3, and 91.5, respectively.

Conclusion Using tests such as %p2PSA and PHI in the standard armamentarium for the diagnosis of metastatic PCa in addition to PSA will help in selecting the appropriate treatment strategy, including active surveillance.

Keywords

prostate cancer - prostate health index - prostate-specific antigen - PSA isoforms

Authors' Contribution

G.N.L. contributed to study concept, design, acquisition analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the article, and revising it critically for intellectual content. P.P.B. drafted the article and revised it critically for intellectual content. S.N. guided, designed, and approved the final version to be published.




Publication History

Article published online:
20 October 2022

© 2022. The Indian Association of Laboratory Physicians. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL. et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71 (03) 209-249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Wang L, Lu B, He M, Wang Y, Wang Z, Du L. Prostate cancer incidence and mortality: global status and temporal trends in 89 countries from 2000 to 2019. Front Public Health 2022; 10: 811044
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Mathur P, Sathishkumar K, Chaturvedi M. et al; ICMR-NCDIR-NCRP Investigator Group. Cancer statistics, 2020: report from National Cancer Registry Programme, India. JCO Glob Oncol 2020; 6: 1063-1075
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Kulothungan V, Sathishkumar K, Leburu S. et al. Burden of cancers in India - estimates of cancer crude incidence, YLLs, YLDs and DALYs for 2021 and 2025 based on National Cancer Registry Program. BMC Cancer 2022; 22 (01) 527
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Ng KL. The etiology of prostate cancer. In: Bott SRJ, Ng KL. eds. Prostate Cancer [Internet]. Chap. 2. Brisbane, Australia: Exon Publications; 2021
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Leitão C, Matos B, Roque F, Herdeiro MT, Fardilha M. The impact of lifestyle on prostate cancer: a road to the discovery of new biomarkers. J Clin Med 2022; 11 (10) 2925
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Klotz L. Active surveillance in intermediate-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int 2020; 125 (03) 346-354
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Kim H, Jung G, Kim JH, Byun SS, Hong SK. Role of prostate health index to predict Gleason score upgrading and high-risk prostate cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens. Sci Rep 2021; 11 (01) 17447
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Hatakeyama S, Yoneyama T, Tobisawa Y, Ohyama C. Recent progress and perspectives on prostate cancer biomarkers. Int J Clin Oncol 2017; 22 (02) 214-221
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Whiting D, Bott SRJ. Current diagnostics for prostate cancer. In: Bott SRJ, Ng KL. eds. Prostate Cancer [Internet]. Chap. 4. Brisbane, Australia: Exon Publications; 2021
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 11 The National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology Prostate Cancer-Version 4. 2022 [Internet]. Accessed July 14, 2022, at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/prostate.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Yan JQ, Huang D, Huang JY. et al. Prostate Health Index (phi) and its derivatives predict Gleason score upgrading after radical prostatectomy among patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Asian J Androl 2022; 24 (04) 406-410
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Miller DR, Ingersoll MA, Teply BA, Lin MF. Combination treatment options for castration-resistant prostate cancer. In: Bott SRJ, Ng KL. eds. Prostate Cancer [Internet]. Chap. 5. Brisbane, Australia: Exon Publications; 2021
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Feldman AS, Meyer CP, Sanchez A. et al. Morbidity and mortality of locally advanced prostate cancer: a population based analysis comparing radical prostatectomy versus external beam radiation. J Urol 2017; 198 (05) 1061-1068
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Duffy MJ. Biomarkers for prostate cancer: prostate-specific antigen and beyond. Clin Chem Lab Med 2020; 58 (03) 326-339
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Vukovic I, Djordjevic D, Bojanic N, Babic U, Soldatovic I. Predictive value of [-2]propsa (p2psa) and its derivatives for the prostate cancer detection in the 2.0 to 10.0ng/mL PSA range. Int Braz J Urol 2017; 43 (01) 48-56
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Loeb S, Catalona WJ. The prostate health index: a new test for the detection of prostate cancer. Ther Adv Urol 2014; 6 (02) 74-77
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Agnello L, Vidali M, Giglio RV. et al. Prostate health index (PHI) as a reliable biomarker for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Chem Lab Med 2022; 60 (08) 1261-1277
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Filella X, Foj L, Wijngaard R, Luque P. Value of PHI and PHID in the detection of intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. Clin Chim Acta 2022; 531: 277-282
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Sriplakich S, Lojanapiwat B, Chongruksut W. et al. Prospective performance of the prostate health index in prostate cancer detection in the first prostate biopsy of men with a total prostatic specific antigen of 4-10 ng/mL and negative digital rectal examination. Prostate Int 2018; 6 (04) 136-139
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Access Hybritech p2PSA [Instructions for use]. Fullerton, United States: Beckman Coulter Inc.; 2011. Accessed September 30, 2022, at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf9/P090026c.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Access Hybritech Free PSA [Instructions for use]. Reference number 37210. Fullerton, United States: Beckman Coulter Inc.; 2020. Accessed September 30, 2022, at: https://www.beckmancoulter.com/download/file/phxA37447P-EN_US/A37447P?type=pdf
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Indrayan A, Malhotra RK. Medical Biostatistics. 4th ed.. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC; 2017
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Chiu PK, Ng CF, Semjonow A. et al. A multicentre evaluation of the role of the prostate health index (PHI) in regions with differing prevalence of prostate cancer: adjustment of PHI reference ranges is needed for European and Asian settings. Eur Urol 2019; 75 (04) 558-561
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Al Saidi SS, Al Riyami NB, Al Marhoon MS. et al. Validity of prostate health index and percentage of [-2] pro-prostate-specific antigen as novel biomarkers in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: Omani tertiary hospitals experience. Oman Med J 2017; 32 (04) 275-283
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Wang W, Wang M, Wang L, Adams TS, Tian Y, Xu J. Diagnostic ability of %p2PSA and prostate health index for aggressive prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Sci Rep 2014; 4: 5012
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Loeb S. Time to replace prostate-specific antigen (PSA) with the prostate health index (PHI)? Yet more evidence that the PHI consistently outperforms PSA across diverse populations. BJU Int 2015; 115 (04) 500
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Garrido MM, Marta JC, Bernardino RM. et al. 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. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2022; 146 (06) 691-700
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Cheng YT, Huang CY, Chen CH. et al. Preoperative %p2PSA and prostate health index predict pathological outcomes in patients with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy. Sci Rep 2020; 10 (01) 776
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 White J, Shenoy BV, Tutrone RF. et al. Clinical utility of the Prostate Health Index (phi) for biopsy decision management in a large group urology practice setting. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2018; 21 (01) 78-84
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Ferro M, De Cobelli O, Lucarelli G. et al. Beyond PSA: the role of prostate health index (phi). Int J Mol Sci 2020; 21 (04) 1184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar