Search

Background: Identifying men for a repeat prostate biopsy is a conundrum to urologists. Risk calculators (RCs) such as the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) RCs have been developed to predict the outcome of prostate biopsies and have been shown to improve diagnostic accuracy compared to PSA alone. However, it was recently shown that the outcome for high-grade prostate cancer (PCa) upon biopsy tended to be underestimated in men with previous negative biopsies using ERSPC RC model 4. For these men, an individualized approach combining the clinical information with the outcome of biomarker-related urine tests may help to make a more informed decision., Case Presentation: Two men, aged 66 and 69 respectively when presented in the clinic, show the typical dilemma of urologist and patient for electing repeat prostate biopsy. Both men had normal DRE findings, did not have a family history of PCa, presented with serum PSA values between 3 and 10 ng/ml and the first biopsies were negative for disease. The ERSPC RC4 did not indicate a biopsy in these men. The urinary molecular biomarker-based test for HOXC6 and DLX1, combining biomarker-expression profiling with clinical risk factors, resulted in SelectMDx Risk scores for these men that were higher than the cut-off of the test. Based on this outcome, mpMRI was performed with an outcome of PI-RADS ≥4 in both men. Histopathological evaluation of TRUS-guided biopsies confirmed high-grade PCa., Conclusions: The urinary molecular biomarker-based risk score played a pivotal role in the diagnosis of clinically significant PCa whereas ERSPC RC4 outcome would not have indicated further diagnostic follow-up in these two cases. The timely diagnosis was shown to be crucial for the curative treatment by radical retropubic prostatectomy and the potential life-years gained for these two vital males.

Purpose: A 2-gene, urine based molecular test that combines mRNA biomarkers with clinical factors can risk stratify patients for clinically significant prostate cancer. To ensure the generalizability of assay results we optimized and validated the clinical model for men with serum prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml who were undergoing initial prostate biopsy., Materials and Methods: Urine samples were collected from 1,955 men from The Netherlands, France and Germany prior to an initial prostate biopsy and study subjects were divided into training and validation cohorts. Urinary HOXC6 and DLX1 mRNA levels were quantified and RNA results were then combined with other risk factors in a clinical model optimized to detect ISUP (International Society of Urological Pathology) Grade Group 2 or greater prostate cancer in men with prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml. Results in the validation cohort were compared with the PCPTRC (Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator), version 2.0., Results: The optimal clinical model included urinary HOXC6 and DLX1 mRNA levels, patient age, digital rectal examination and prostate specific antigen density (serum prostate specific antigen/prostate volume). In the 715 validation cohort subjects with prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml the AUC was 0.82 with 89% sensitivity, 53% specificity and 95% negative predictive value. The PCPTRC AUC was 0.70. The full validation cohort of 916 men including all prostate specific antigen levels yielded an AUC of 0.85 with 93% sensitivity, 47% specificity and 95% negative predictive value. The PCPTRC AUC was 0.76., Conclusions: The 2-gene based urine assay, which is optimized for biopsy naïve patients with serum prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml, demonstrated high sensitivity and negative predictive value to detect clinically significant prostate cancer. These data support using the test to help guide initial prostate biopsy decisions.

Introduction: There is an unmet need for noninvasive methods to better identify patients at increased risk for clinically significant prostate cancer. SelectMDx® is a molecular urine test validated for the detection of Gleason score 7 and higher cancers (ISUP [International Society of Urological Pathology] Grade Group 2-5). In this multicenter trial we evaluated the test's impact on prostate biopsy decision making in clinical practice., Methods: The study involved 5 U.S. community urology practices which sequentially enrolled 418 patients who received a SelectMDx test between May 2016 and April 2017 while undergoing evaluation for initial prostate biopsy. All tests were ordered by the urologist for patient management. We determined biopsy and prostate cancer detection rates in patients with SelectMDx positive versus SelectMDx negative results., Results: Of the 418 subjects evaluated with SelectMDx 253 (61%) had negative results and 165 (39%) had positive results. Subsequent biopsy rates for SelectMDx positive and negative cases were 60% (99) and 12% (32), respectively (p <0.001). Time from SelectMDx result to biopsy was shorter for those with positive vs negative results (median 2 vs 5 months, p=0.001). Of patients who underwent biopsy within 3 months of testing 71 (43%) with positive results underwent biopsy and 27 had cancers identified, including 10 greater than Grade Group 2. Of 9 patients with SelectMDx negative results (3.6%) who underwent biopsy 4 were diagnosed with cancer, all Grade Group 2 or less., Conclusions: SelectMDx had a significant impact on initial prostate biopsy decision making. Biopsy rates in SelectMDx positive cases were fivefold higher than in SelectMDx negative cases. These results describe the clinical utility of SelectMDx in real-world community urology practice.

Background: Low specificity of prostate-specific antigen results in a considerable number of unnecessary prostate biopsies in current practice. SelectMDx® predicts significant prostate cancer upon biopsy and is used to reduce the number of unnecessary initial prostate biopsies. Furthermore, potential overtreatment of insignificant prostate cancer can be reduced. Besides the diagnostic accuracy of the test, also the context in a specific country determines the potential health benefit and cost-effectiveness. Therefore, the health benefit and cost-effectiveness of SelectMDx were assessed in France, Germany, Italy, and Spain., Subject and Methods: A decision model was used to compare the current standard of care in which men undergo initial prostate biopsy in case of an elevated prostate-specific antigen, to a strategy in which SelectMDx was used to select men for biopsy. Model inputs most relevant to each of the four countries were obtained. With use of the model long-term quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and healthcare costs were calculated for both strategies., Results: In all four countries, the SelectMDx resulted in QALY gain and cost savings compared with the current standard of care. In France, SelectMDx resulted in 0.022 QALYs gained and cost savings of €1217 per patient. For Germany, the model showed a QALY gain of 0.016 and a cost saving of €442. In Italy, the QALY gain and cost savings were 0.031 and €762. In Spain 0.020 QALYs were gained and €250 costs were saved., Conclusions: The results of the model showed that with SelectMDx, QALYs could be gained while saving healthcare costs in the initial diagnosis of prostate cancer. The significant presence of overtreatment in the current standard of care in all four countries was the main factor that resulted in the beneficial outcomes with SelectMDx.

Background: To reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment, a test is urgently needed to detect clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa)., Objective: To develop a multimodal model, incorporating previously identified messenger RNA (mRNA) biomarkers and traditional risk factors that could be used to identify patients with high-grade PCa (Gleason score ≥7) on prostate biopsy., Design, Setting, and Participants: In two prospective multicenter studies, urine was collected for mRNA profiling after digital rectal examination (DRE) and prior to prostate biopsy. The multimodal risk score was developed on a first cohort (n=519) and subsequently validated clinically in an independent cohort (n=386)., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The mRNA levels were measured using reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Logistic regression was used to model patient risk and combine risk factors. Models were compared using the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic, and clinical utility was evaluated with a decision curve analysis (DCA)., Results and Limitations: HOXC6 and DLX1 mRNA levels were shown to be good predictors for the detection of high-grade PCa. The multimodal approach reached an overall AUC of 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-0.95) in the validation cohort (AUC 0.86 in the training cohort), with the mRNA signature, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density, and previous cancer-negative prostate biopsies as the strongest, most significant components, in addition to nonsignificant model contributions of PSA, age, and family history. For another model, which included DRE as an additional risk factor, an AUC of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.80-0.92) was obtained (AUC 0.90 in the training cohort). Both models were successfully validated, with no significant change in AUC in the validation cohort, and DCA indicated a strong net benefit and the best reduction in unnecessary biopsies compared with other clinical decision-making tools, such as the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator and the PCA3 assay., Conclusions: The risk score based on the mRNA liquid biopsy assay combined with traditional clinical risk factors identified men at risk of harboring high-grade PCa and resulted in a better patient risk stratification compared with current methods in clinical practice. Therefore, the risk score could reduce the number of unnecessary prostate biopsies., Patient Summary: This study evaluated a novel urine-based assay that could be used as a noninvasive diagnostic aid for high-grade prostate cancer (PCa). When results of this assay are combined with traditional clinical risk factors, risk stratification for high-grade PCa and biopsy decision making are improved., (Copyright © 2016 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Serum PSA (sPSA) testing has led to the identification of patients with indolent prostate cancer, and inevitably overtreatment has become a concern. Progensa PCA3 urine testing was shown to improve the diagnosis of prostate cancer, but its diagnostic value for aggressive prostate cancer is limited. Therefore, urinary biomarkers that can be used for prediction of Gleason score ≥7 prostate cancer in biopsies are urgently needed., Experimental Design: Using gene expression profiling data, 39 prostate cancer biomarkers were identified. After quantitative PCR analysis on tissue specimens and urinary sediments, eight promising biomarkers for the urinary detection of prostate cancer were selected (ONECUT2, HOXC4, HOXC6, DLX1, TDRD1, NKAIN1, MS4A8B, PPFIA2). The hypothesis that biomarker combinations improve the diagnostic value for aggressive prostate cancer was tested on 358 urinary sediments of an intention-to-treat cohort., Results: A urinary three-gene panel (HOXC6, TDRD1, and DLX1) had higher accuracy [area under the curve (AUC), 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.71-0.83] to predict Gleason score ≥7 prostate cancer in biopsies compared with Progensa PCA3 (AUC, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.62-0.75) or sPSA (AUC, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.65-0.78). Combining the three-gene panel with sPSA further improved the predictive accuracy (AUC, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.75-0.86). The accuracy of the three-gene predictive model was maintained in subgroups with low sPSA concentrations., Conclusions: The urinary three-gene panel (HOXC6, TDRD1, and DLX1) represents a promising tool to identify patients with aggressive prostate cancer, also in those with low sPSA values. The combination of the urinary three-gene panel with sPSA bears great potential for the early diagnosis of patients with clinically significant prostate cancer., (©2015 American Association for Cancer Research.)