KAPS-biomarker for early diagnosis of prostate cancer

K. Chadha, W. Underwood
{"title":"KAPS-biomarker for early diagnosis of prostate cancer","authors":"K. Chadha, W. Underwood","doi":"10.21767/2254-6081-C3-011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"P cancer (CaP) is the most common non-skin cancer in men and third most common cause of cancer deaths in men. Black men experience a higher burden of incidence and mortality from CaP compared to White men. The prostatespecific antigen (PSA) test, a commonly used biomarker for early diagnosis and management of CaP, cannot alone accurately predict the presence of CaP, its aggressiveness, or the risk of post-treatment recurrence. The widespread use of PSA testing in CaP screening is controversial partially because patients with benign enlargement of the prostate often have elevated levels of PSA and many men with diagnosed CaP have a normal PSA. Consequently, a search for more effective prostate tumor biomarkers is overdue. Our studies thus far show that concurrent measurements of the levels of serum cytokines such as IL-8, TNF-α, and sTNF-R1 (KAPS biomarker) provide a significant advantage as a CaP biomarker over PSA measurements alone in differentiating men with CaP from men without CaP. Our working hypothesis is that both Black and White men with CaP have altered circulating levels of KAPS biomarker compared to men without CaP. Further, the extent to which these levels are altered will vary according to CaP risk factors and can be used as a tool to improve the early detection of CaP and CaP treatment decision-making. We tested our hypothesis in a retrospective study of men with elevated PSA but a negative prostate biopsy, patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer and patients with castration resistant CaP (CRPC). The predictive accuracy of the markers was described using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. In our analysis, AUC values greater than 0.8 were considered as useful in predicting CaP outcomes for individual patients. All the comparisons for KAPS biomarker were statistically significant at the p<0.05 level. The AUC for each of marker alone was statistically superior to PSA alone (p<0.01 for each pairwise comparison). Each of the KAPS-marker combination AUCs was significantly better than PSA alone (p<0.01 for all), but not statistically different from each other. Combining TNF-α with PSA resulted in a 3.0-fold decrease in the PSAalone false positive fraction (FPF), and a 3.7-fold decrease in the PSAalone false negative fraction (FNF). The PSA+sTNFR1 combination had a 5.9-fold decrease in the FPF, and a 2.5-fold decrease in FNF. Ability of KAPS-biomarker was also effective at distinguishing between localized CaP and metastatic CaP patients. AUC results (with 95% confidence intervals) for additive combinations of these biomarkers will also be discussed. The best predictor of localized CaP vs. metastatic CaP was KAPS combined with PSA 0.999 (0.998 to 1.000). Due to the reported significant racial differences in the diagnoses of and mortality from CaP, future CaP biomarker studies should include a racially diverse sample of men, especially Black men.","PeriodicalId":91204,"journal":{"name":"Archives in cancer research","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives in cancer research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21767/2254-6081-C3-011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

P cancer (CaP) is the most common non-skin cancer in men and third most common cause of cancer deaths in men. Black men experience a higher burden of incidence and mortality from CaP compared to White men. The prostatespecific antigen (PSA) test, a commonly used biomarker for early diagnosis and management of CaP, cannot alone accurately predict the presence of CaP, its aggressiveness, or the risk of post-treatment recurrence. The widespread use of PSA testing in CaP screening is controversial partially because patients with benign enlargement of the prostate often have elevated levels of PSA and many men with diagnosed CaP have a normal PSA. Consequently, a search for more effective prostate tumor biomarkers is overdue. Our studies thus far show that concurrent measurements of the levels of serum cytokines such as IL-8, TNF-α, and sTNF-R1 (KAPS biomarker) provide a significant advantage as a CaP biomarker over PSA measurements alone in differentiating men with CaP from men without CaP. Our working hypothesis is that both Black and White men with CaP have altered circulating levels of KAPS biomarker compared to men without CaP. Further, the extent to which these levels are altered will vary according to CaP risk factors and can be used as a tool to improve the early detection of CaP and CaP treatment decision-making. We tested our hypothesis in a retrospective study of men with elevated PSA but a negative prostate biopsy, patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer and patients with castration resistant CaP (CRPC). The predictive accuracy of the markers was described using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. In our analysis, AUC values greater than 0.8 were considered as useful in predicting CaP outcomes for individual patients. All the comparisons for KAPS biomarker were statistically significant at the p<0.05 level. The AUC for each of marker alone was statistically superior to PSA alone (p<0.01 for each pairwise comparison). Each of the KAPS-marker combination AUCs was significantly better than PSA alone (p<0.01 for all), but not statistically different from each other. Combining TNF-α with PSA resulted in a 3.0-fold decrease in the PSAalone false positive fraction (FPF), and a 3.7-fold decrease in the PSAalone false negative fraction (FNF). The PSA+sTNFR1 combination had a 5.9-fold decrease in the FPF, and a 2.5-fold decrease in FNF. Ability of KAPS-biomarker was also effective at distinguishing between localized CaP and metastatic CaP patients. AUC results (with 95% confidence intervals) for additive combinations of these biomarkers will also be discussed. The best predictor of localized CaP vs. metastatic CaP was KAPS combined with PSA 0.999 (0.998 to 1.000). Due to the reported significant racial differences in the diagnoses of and mortality from CaP, future CaP biomarker studies should include a racially diverse sample of men, especially Black men.
kaps -前列腺癌早期诊断的生物标志物
前列腺癌(CaP)是男性最常见的非皮肤癌,也是男性癌症死亡的第三大常见原因。与白人男性相比,黑人男性的CaP发病率和死亡率负担更高。前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)检测是早期诊断和治疗前列腺癌的常用生物标志物,但不能单独准确预测前列腺癌的存在、侵袭性或治疗后复发的风险。PSA检测在CaP筛查中的广泛应用存在争议,部分原因是前列腺良性肿大患者的PSA水平经常升高,而许多确诊为CaP的男性的PSA水平正常。因此,寻找更有效的前列腺肿瘤生物标志物是迟来的。到目前为止,我们的研究表明,同时测量血清细胞因子水平,如IL-8、TNF-α和sTNF-R1 (KAPS生物标志物)作为CaP生物标志物,在区分患有CaP的男性和没有CaP的男性方面,比单独测量PSA具有显著优势。我们的工作假设是,与没有CaP的男性相比,患有CaP的黑人和白人男性都改变了KAPS生物标志物的循环水平。这些水平的改变程度将根据CaP的风险因素而有所不同,可以作为一种工具来改善CaP的早期发现和CaP的治疗决策。我们对PSA升高但前列腺活检阴性的男性、诊断为局限性前列腺癌的患者和去势抵抗性CaP (CRPC)患者进行了回顾性研究,验证了我们的假设。使用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线描述标记物的预测准确度。在我们的分析中,AUC值大于0.8被认为对预测个体患者的CaP结果有用。KAPS生物标志物比较在p<0.05水平上均有统计学意义。单独使用每种标记物的AUC均优于单独使用PSA(两两比较均p<0.01)。kaps -标志物联合auc均显著优于PSA单独auc (p<0.01),但差异无统计学意义。TNF-α联合PSA可使PSAalone假阳性分数(FPF)降低3.0倍,PSAalone假阴性分数(FNF)降低3.7倍。PSA+sTNFR1联合治疗FNF降低5.9倍,FNF降低2.5倍。kaps生物标志物的能力在区分局限性CaP和转移性CaP患者方面也很有效。还将讨论这些生物标志物添加组合的AUC结果(95%置信区间)。局部CaP与转移性CaP的最佳预测指标是KAPS联合PSA 0.999(0.998 ~ 1.000)。由于CaP的诊断和死亡率存在显著的种族差异,未来的CaP生物标志物研究应包括种族多样化的男性样本,特别是黑人男性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信