BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether the Prostate Health Index (PHI) or the urinary Prostate-Cancer Antigen 3 (PCA-3) score is more accurate at screening for prostate cancer (PCa).
FREE DAILY AND WEEKLY NEWSLETTERS OFFERED BY CONTENT OF INTEREST
Did you find this article relevant? Subscribe to UroToday-GUOncToday!
The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are advancing rapidly including new treatments, enrolling clinical trials, screening and surveillance recommendations along with updated guidelines. Join us as one of our subscribers who rely on UroToday as their must-read source for the latest news and data on drugs. Sign up today for blogs, video conversations, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.
The aim of this study was to prospectively compare the accuracy of PHI and PCA-3 scores to predict overall and significant PCa in men undergoing an initial prostate biopsy.
METHODS: Double-blind assessments of PHI and PCA-3 were conducted by referent physicians in 138 patients who subsequently underwent trans-rectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy according to a 12-core scheme. Predictive accuracies of PHI and PCA-3 were assessed using AUC and compared according to the DeLong method. Diagnostic performances with usual cut-off values for positivity (i.e., PHI >40 and PCA-3 >35) were calculated, and odds ratios associated with predicting PCa overall and significant PCa as defined by pathological updated Epstein criteria (i.e., Gleason score ≥7, more than three positive cores, or >50% cancer involvement in any core) were estimated using logistic regression.
RESULTS: Prevalences of overall and significant PCa were 44.9% and 28.3%, respectively. PCA-3 (AUC = 0.71) was the most accurate predictor of PCa overall, and significantly outperformed PHI (AUC = 0.65; P = 0.03). However, PHI (AUC = 0.80) remained the most accurate predictor when screening exclusively for significant PCa and significantly outperformed PCA-3 (AUC = 0.55; P = 0.03). Furthermore, PCA-3 >35 had the best accuracy, and positive or negative predictive values when screening for PCa overall whereas these diagnostic performances were greater for PHI >40 when exclusively screening for significant PCa. PHI > 40 combined with PCA-3 > 35 was more specific in both cases. In multivariate analyses, PCA-3 >35 (OR = 5.68; 95%CI = (2.21-14.59); P < 0.001) was significantly correlated with the presence of PCa overall, but PHI >40 (OR = 9.60; 95%CI = (1.72-91.32); P = 0.001) was the only independent predictor for detecting significant PCa.
CONCLUSIONS: Although PCA-3 score is the best predictor for PCa overall at initial biopsy, our findings strongly indicate that PHI should be used for population-based screening to avoid over-diagnosis of indolent tumors that are unlikely to cause death.
Seisen T, Rouprêt M, Brault D, Léon P, Cancel-Tassin G, Compérat E, Renard-Penna R, Mozer P, Guechot J, Cussenot O. Are you the author?
Academic Department of Urology, Pitié-Salpétrière Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France; UPMC Univ Paris 06, GRC5, ONCOTYPE-URO, Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie, Paris, France.
Reference: Prostate. 2014 Oct 18. Epub ahead of print.