BACKGROUND: The role of PCa3 score in the diagnostics of prostate cancer (PCa) is still under debate, mainly due to the lack of a univocal cut-off useful alone or within nomograms proposed by Urologists.
Aim of present study is to compare different PCA3 score cut-off values (20, 25, 35 and 50) observed in 734 patients with suspected PCa who were monitored for about three years with single or multiple biopsies.
METHODS: 734 patients who underwent first prostate biopsy for suspected PCa were enrolled. One month later the first biopsy result was obtained, both negative and positive PCa patients were investigated by means of PCA3 score, in order to establish risk of PCa presence on repeated biopsies.
RESULTS: PCA3 score was significantly higher (p< 0.001) in PCa patients to the PCa negative ones, while tPSA did not significantly vary. The best negative predictive value (NPV 97.5%) and sensitivity (95.4%) result were obtained when a PCA3 score of 20 was used. At cut-off value of 50, the 75% of patients resulted as false positive.
CONCLUSIONS: PCA3 score of 20 could be safely introduced in the prostate cancer screening diagnostic flow chart, since it provides important information regarding the outcome of re-biopsy.
Written by:
Capoluongo E, Zambon CF, Basso D, Boccia S, Rocchetti S, Leoncini E, Palumbo S, Padoan A, Albino G, Todaro A, Prayer-Galetti T, Zattoni F, Zuppi C, Plebani M. Are you the author?
Laboratory of Clinical Molecular Biology, Institute of Biochemistry and Clinical Biochemistry, Catholic University School of Medicine, Italy; Department Laboratory Medicine, DIMED, University of Padova, Italy; Section of Hygiene, Institute of Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore of Rome, Italy; Laboratory of Clinical Molecular Biology, Institute of Biochemistry and Clinical Biochemistry, Catholic University School of Medicine, Italy; Department of Surgical, Oncological and Gastroenterological Sciences, University of Padova, DiSCOG, Italy; Department Laboratory Medicine, DIMED, University of Padova, Italy. ;
Reference: Clin Chim Acta. 2013 Nov 20;429C:46-50.
doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2013.10.022
PubMed Abstract
PMID: 24269853
UroToday.com Prostate Cancer Section
