To evaluate the inter-assay variability of six commercially available prostate specific antigen (PSA) assays, its clinical impact in prostate cancer (PCa) and comparison of automated versus manual assays.
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.
Sera from 495 patients (425 with PCa and 70 men with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH), were measured with six different assays [three automated assays (a-PSA) and three manual ELISA based assay (m-PSA)]. Variability, agreement and bias were measured and compared among assays using Bland Altman plots and Passing and Bablok regression analysis. The possible impact of inter-assay variability on important clinical scenarios was also studied.
All the assays were well correlated (r: 0. 88-0. 98); however there was significant disagreement and bias between the systems, which were more pronounced among the a-PSA assays. The Bland Altman plot showed that the variability was high between the m-PSA assays and the standard Abbott system with mean difference of 3. 8-5. 8ng/ml. In contrast, the a-PSA had better agreement with mean difference of 0. 8-2. 3ng/mL. Beckman Coulter showed the best agreement to the institutional reference (slope-1. 097; 95% CI: 1. 06-1. 14; p
The discrepancies between the assays lead to significant clinical misinterpretation with risk group migration and detection of biochemical failure post radiotherapy. There are significant discordances between automated and ELISA based assays.
Clinical biochemistry. 2015 Oct 23 [Epub ahead of print]
Vedang Murthy, Anupam Rishi, Sanjeev Gupta, Sadhna Kannan, Umesh Mahantshetty, Hemant Tongaonkar, Ganesh Bakshi, Kumar Prabhash, Paresh Bhanushali, Shyam Kishore Shrivastava
Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. , Yashraj Biotechnology Limited, Navi Mumbai, India. , Department of Biostatistics, Advanced Centre of Treatment Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Navi Mumbai. , India. , Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. , Department of Uro-Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. , Department of Uro-Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. , Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. , Yashraj Biotechnology Limited, Navi Mumbai, India. , Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India.