Prostate cancer: risk assessment and diagnostic approaches

The successful treatment of prostate cancer relies on detection of the disease at its earliest stages. Although prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening has been a significant advance in the early diagnosis of prostate cancer, identifying specific genetic alterations in a given family or patient will allow more appropriate screening for early disease. Mapping and identification of specific prostate cancer susceptibility genes is slowly becoming a reality. Other prostate cancer risks include a family history, race, and possibly serum markers such as insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I). Once a high-risk man is identified, transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsies are the standard to diagnose prostate cancer. Although TRUS is an advance over traditional digitally directed biopsies, it represents a random sampling of the prostate since most lesions cannot be visualized. Newer modalities such as ultrasound contrast agents, pattern recognition, and artificial neural networks (ANNs), applied to TRUS images, may improve diagnostic accuracy. If a man at risk for prostate cancer has undergone a negative TRUS biopsy, the decision for the need for additional biopsies is problematic. Use of PSA derivatives such as free and total PSA and the initial biopsy abnormalities such as atypia or high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia may define those patients in need of follow-up biopsy.     

Atypical prostatic glandular proliferations on needle biopsy: Diagnostic implications, use of immunohistochemistry, and clinical significance

In recent times, PSA screening and a substantial increase in prostate needle biopsies have not only resulted in detection of minute foci of cancer but have also very likely resulted in increased detection of atypical glandular proliferations. Not uncommonly, there are only a limited number of atypical glands in these biopsies, and these require careful evaluation to enable an accurate diagnosis. We describe diagnostic implications, use of immunohistochemistry, and clinical significance of these lesions. Foci of atypical glands, also labeled atypical small acinar proliferation of uncertain significance, have features suspicious for but not diagnostic of cancer. Atypical foci include a broad group of lesions of differing clinical significance. These include benign, small acinar proliferations mimicking prostate cancer and atypical glandular proliferations suspicious for carcinoma. Definite diagnosis requires accurate histopathologic assessment and judicious use of immunohistochemistry. Patients with atypical glands on prostate needle biopsy have a high risk for harboring cancer and therefore have an increased risk for having cancer detected in subsequent biopsies.     

Optimizing prostate biopsy strategies for the diagnosis of prostate cancer

The importance of prostate biopsy in urologic practice has been magnified by the routine use of serum prostate-specific antigen in prostate cancer screening. Given the potential impact of the procedure on both patient care and health care costs, an optimal strategy for accurate and judicious detection of early prostate cancer is imperative. Maintaining maximal sensitivity and negative predictive value are equally important to the patient. In this article, we review recent modifications in prostate biopsy indications and techniques that may allow for a systematic biopsy approach to the patient in whom prostate cancer is suspected.     

Treatment options after failure of radiation therapy-a review

Radioresistant or recurrent prostate cancer represents a serious health risk for approximately 20%-30% of patients treated with primary radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. The majority of patients exhibit large volume and poorly differentiated disease at the time of diagnosis, which limits the ability of salvage therapy to eradicate the cancer. Early detection with serum PSA monitoring and prostate needle biopsy following primary radiation therapy may identify residual adenocarcinoma at an earlier stage and increase the likelihood of successful salvage therapy. Radical prostatectomy, prostate cryoablation, and brachytherapy comprise the options for salvage treatment available for radiorecurrent prostate cancer. The goal of disease eradication must be balanced against the potential for serious treatment-related side effects. As a result, many patients receive noncurative therapy with androgen ablation despite the real risk of disease progression and mortality.     

Variations in prostate biopsy recommendation and acceptance confound evaluation of risk factors for prostate cancer: Examining race and BMI

BackgroundProstate cancer is ubiquitous in older men; differential screening patterns and variations in biopsy recommendations and acceptance will affect which man is diagnosed and, therefore, evaluation of cancer risk factors. We describe a statistical method to reduce prostate cancer detection bias among African American (n = 3398) and Non-Hispanic White men (n = 22,673) who participated in the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention trial (SELECT) and revisit a previously reported association between race, obesity and prostate cancer risk.MethodsFor men with screening values suggesting prostate cancer but in whom biopsy was not performed, the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator was used to estimate probability of prostate cancer. Associations of body mass index (BMI) and race with incident prostate cancer were compared for observed versus imputation-enhanced outcomes using incident density ratios.ResultsAccounting for differential biopsy assessment, the previously reported positive linear trend between BMI and prostate cancer in African American men was not observed; no BMI association was found among Non-Hispanic White men.ConclusionsDifferential disease classification among men who may be recommended to undergo and then consider whether to accept a prostate biopsy leads to inaccurate identification of prostate cancer risk factors. Imputing a man’s prostate cancer status reduces detection bias. Covariate adjustment does not address the problem of outcome misclassification. Cohorts evaluating incident prostate cancer should collect longitudinal screening and biopsy data to adjust for this potential bias.     

靶向蛋白质泛素修饰及降解在前列腺癌治疗中的机遇与挑战

前列腺癌是中国发病率增长最快的男性肿瘤,抗雄激素治疗耐药是导致前列腺癌患者预后差的主要原因。因此,解决耐药性难题是前列腺癌转化研究的关键问题。哺乳动物细胞利用泛素-蛋白酶体系统实现蛋白质的靶向降解。因此,前列腺癌中关键的癌基因如雄激素受体（AR）的上游泛素化调控因子（如去泛素化酶）是潜在的治疗靶点。然而,这些酶具有较广的底物谱系,存在脱靶的可能性。近来,基于泛素-蛋白酶体系统开发的蛋白质降解靶向嵌合体（proteolysis-targeting chimeras,PROTAC）技术是最具前景和革命性的新型抗癌药物研发技术,能够利用特定E3泛素连接酶对靶蛋白进行降解而不影响其他底物。与传统小分子抑制剂相比,PROTAC分子在克服耐药性以及针对不可成药的靶点方面拥有巨大优势。目前,针对AR的PROTAC降解剂已在II期临床取得了成功,靶向蛋白质泛素化及降解途径的新技术将有望为前列腺癌的临床治疗带来新的突破。     

Clinical utility of prostate carcinoma molecular diagnostic tests

Instead of relying on serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) to identify patients for prostate biopsy, new laboratory tests are needed that have improved specificity for prostate carcinoma (CaP), allow accurate classification of clinically insignificant CaPs, allow for detection of clinically significant CaP in patients without elevated serum PSA, and allow for identification of aggressive forms of CaP, which may warrant adjunctive or even molecularly targeted therapy in the future. Over the last several years, high-throughput gene expression profiling and proteinomics have led to the identification of genes and proteins that are specifically overexpressed in CaP. Molecular diagnostic techniques readily translated to the clinical laboratory have been incorporated into the development of new tests based on these novel molecular alterations in CaP. Some of these tests already have well-documented clinical utility, such as in facilitating prostate biopsy decisions, and are routinely available. The current review focuses on the biological, clinical, and laboratory aspects of the most promising of these current and near-future molecular CaP tests.     

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging of prostate cancer

Ultrasound imaging of the prostate is commonly used to assess the size of the gland and for needle placement during systematic biopsy. Ultrasound evaluation of prostate cancer is limited by difficulty in distinguishing benign from malignant tissue. Although Doppler techniques may provide some improvement in the detection of prostate cancer, targeted biopsy based on conventional ultrasound with Doppler is not sufficient to replace systematic biopsy. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging techniques that employ microbubble contrast agents represent an innovative approach to imaging of the neovascularity associated with prostate cancer. This review describes the application of contrast-enhanced ultrasound to improve detection and assessment of prostate cancer.     

Prostate cancer association studies: pitfalls and solutions to cancer misclassification in the PSA era

Widespread screening of American men for elevated PSA has changed the characteristics of prostate cancer cases in the U.S. The influence of the changed nature of prostate cancer cases in the PSA era and the need for careful consideration of who is a "case" and who is a "control" on the ability to detect associations of risk factors with prostate cancer in etiologic epidemiologic studies merits discussion. Issue 1: prostate cancer cases diagnosed in the PSA era are enriched with a pool of early lesions, which may differ in etiology, and are deficient in advanced lesions, which are the most likely to be the product of promotion and progression events. By admixing the two types of cases (i.e., imperfect specificity), the associations previously detected using epidemiologic designs when the majority of cases were clinically detected may no longer be apparent in the PSA era when the majority of cases are now detected in the pre-clinical phase. Researchers must now tailor hypotheses such that they are testable using early stage cases or specifically augment the number of advanced cases when testing hypotheses related to extraprostatic growth and progression. Issue 2: even when controls are screened for elevated PSA to rule out the presence of prostate cancer, some proportion of those controls currently will have one or more foci of prostate cancer. The imperfect sensitivity of the PSA test coupled with diagnostic work-up may in part result from (a) lack of PSA elevation in some men with prostate cancer or (b) failure of biopsy to sample the tumor focus in men with elevated PSA. Misclassification of men with undetected prostate cancer as controls usually produces a bias that tends to deflate associations. Given this type of disease misclassification, whether an association still can be statistically detected depends on the extent of misclassification, the magnitude of the true association, the prevalence of the exposure in the true controls, and the sample size, although in general moderate nondifferential misclassification does not lead to profound attenuation. However, under the same scenario attenuation does not occur in cohort or case-cohort studies in which the rate or risk ratio (RR) is calculated. That prostate cancer cases diagnosed in the PSA era are enriched with early stage, minimally invasive disease in our opinion is likely to pose a far more serious obstacle to epidemiologic research on the etiology of clinically important prostate cancer than the issue of inclusion as controls some men who have undiagnosed prostate cancer because of imperfect sensitivity of PSA screening and biopsy sampling error.     

Effect of antibiotic treatment on serum PSA and percent free PSA levels in patients with biochemical criteria for prostate biopsy and previous lower urinary tract infections

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists as to the influence of inflammatory foci on total and free prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentrations. The objective was to analyze the biological variations of PSA and percent free PSA (%f-PSA) in patients with biochemical criteria for prostate biopsy (PSA higher than 4 ng/mL and normal rectal examination) and compare them with the variation induced by antibiotic treatment in a cohort of patients with a history of lower urinary tract infections and no clinical evidence of prostatitis. METHODS: Ninety patients with a history of lower urinary tract infections, non-suspicious digital rectal examination and PSA between 4 and 20 ng/mL were analyzed. PSA concentration and %f-PSA were determined. Forty-five patients were treated with three weeks of ofloxacin, following which marker determination was repeated. All patients underwent ultrasound-controlled transrectal six-core prostate biopsy. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients presented benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) (30 with prostatitic foci) and 23 cancer. Significant variations in PSA (6.97 ng/mL vs. 5.82 ng/mL, p=0.001) and %f-PSA (14.84% vs. 17.53%, p=0.01) were found only in the treated patients. These differences were significant for patients with BPH-associated prostatitic foci and not for patients with BPH or cancer. The tendency was for PSA to decrease (15 treated patients with PSA <4 ng/mL vs. six non-treated patients) and for %f-PSA to increase. The median variation of %f-PSA was greater than that of PSA. When the cutoff for %f-PSA was set at 25%, 18.9% of unnecessary biopsies after the first determination and 20% after the second could be avoided. By associating the reduction in PSA, up to 46% could be avoided in treated patients. CONCLUSION: Biochemical criteria for prostate biopsy may be modified in patients with a history of lower urinary tract infections due to variations greater than those explained by intraindividual biological variations, and may be influenced by the antibiotic treatment. These results suggest that subclinical inflammatory foci may influence PSA and %f-PSA.     

Review of the literature: PCA3 for prostate cancer risk assessment and prognostication

Prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) is a novel urine-based prostate cancer biomarker that has recently been studied extensively for the prediction of prostate biopsy results and treatment outcomes. Numerous studies have demonstrated that urinary PCA3 scores are predictive of prostate cancer detection on both initial and repeat biopsy. There is conflicting evidence on the relationship between PCA3 with aggressive tumor features and treatment outcomes. This article reviews the current evidence on PCA3 as a marker for prostate cancer detection and prognosis.     

超声弹性成像技术在前列腺癌诊断中的应用

超声弹性成像技术是一项新兴的超声成像方法,可通过分析不同组织间机械组织差异区分组织软硬度,早期主要应用于乳腺、甲状腺结节的区分和定性。随着科技的进步和医疗水平的提高,目前弹性成像技术可在二维声像图的基础上,对感兴趣区域进行定性诊断和定量分析,已逐步应用于医学各领域相关研究和临床疾病的鉴别诊断。本文介绍了弹性成像的基本原理和目前弹性成像技术在医学领域中的相关应用,叙述了前列腺癌的发展趋势和目前常用的筛查、诊断方法,详细阐述了弹性成像技术在前列腺癌诊断中的应用方法和现状,分析总结了弹性成像技术在前列腺癌诊断中的应用价值。运用弹性成像技术无创、经济便捷、实时动态、可重复性好等优点,联合前列腺癌相关筛查、诊断检查,可有效帮助早期诊断前列腺癌,减少前列腺穿刺术的针数,提高前列腺癌的检出率。     

Using Biopsy to Detect Prostate Cancer

Transrectal ultrasound-guided systemic biopsy is the recommended method in most cases with suspicion of prostate cancer. Transrectal periprostatic injection with a local anesthetic may be offered as effective analgesia; periprostatic nerve block with 1% or 2% lidocaine is the recommended form of pain control. On initial biopsy, a minimum of 10 systemic, laterally directed cores is recommended, with more cores in larger glands. Extended prostate biopsy schemes, which require cores weighted more laterally at the base (lateral horn) and medially to the apex, show better cancer detection rates without increasing adverse events. Transition zone biopsies are not recommended in the first set of biopsies, owing to low detection rates. One set of repeat biopsies is warranted in cases with persistent indication. Saturation biopsy (≥20 cores) should be reserved for repeat biopsy in patients who have negative results on initial biopsy but who are still strongly suspected to have prostate cancer.Key words: Prostate cancer, Biopsy, Transrectal ultrasound, Prostate-specific antigen, Anesthesia, NomogramsProstate cancer rarely causes symptoms until it is advanced. Thus, suspicion of prostate cancer resulting in a recommendation for prostatic biopsy is most often raised by abnormalities found on digital rectal examination (DRE) or by serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) elevations. Although there is controversy regarding the benefits of early diagnosis, it has been demonstrated that an early diagnosis of prostate cancer is best achieved using a combination of DRE and PSA.Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided, systematic needle biopsy is the most reliable method, at present, to ensure accurate sampling of prostatic tissue in men considered at high risk for harboring prostatic cancer on the basis of DRE and PSA findings. In very rare circumstances, a biopsy of a metastatic site (bone lesion) or a suspicious lymph node may be easier and more advantageous. There are also circumstances in which the usual transrectal route is not feasible (eg, status post-anteroposterior resection of the rectosigmoid; see Tissue Diagnosis in Patients with No Rectal Access section, below). As nearly universal as the approach, as nearly universal is the technique, namely a TRUS-guided biopsy using an 18-gauge needle to obtain a tissue core. To be certain, the same biopsy device and needle may be used to perform a finger-guided biopsy, but this is reserved for unusual circumstances (eg, TRUS imaging not available, finger-guided directed biopsy of suspicious nodule not seen on TRUS). Last, whereas in decades past physicians in many countries performed fine-needle aspiration of the prostate, today this technique is less and less often used, although advocates claim that it is cheaper, faster, easier to perform, and results in lower morbidity than any other technique developed to date. Appropriate training in performing transrectal fine-needle aspiration of the prostate and in interpreting the smears is, of course, essential.¹ Fine-needle aspiration plays a major role in the aforementioned situations in which diagnosis is established from nonprostatic tissue sources, such as lymph nodes and others.^2,3Since the landmark study by Hodge and colleagues⁴ demonstrating the superiority of TRUS guidance compared with digitally guided biopsy, the TRUS-guided biopsy technique has become the worldwide accepted standard in prostate cancer diagnosis. Statistical performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values) of all other diagnostic tests (eg, DRE and PSA assay) is calculated according to the assignment (cancer present vs absent) made by prostate biopsy. Recognizing the fact that all sampling procedures, including prostate biopsies, incur the risk of returning false-negative results (ie, cancer is present but missed by the biopsies), calculation of the statistical performance characteristics of all other tests using biopsy outcomes as the gold standard are inherently incorrect and biased. Similarly, when comparing the statistical performance of various biopsy strategies, usually the most extensive strategy is chosen as the gold standard to define disease presence or absence, and the performance of all other strategies is calculated on the basis of that particular strategy, again incurring a significant bias due to the remaining falsenegative rate of even the most extensive sampling strategy.     

Biomarkers for prostate cancer

The detection of prostate cancer using a blood test has by many standards changed the face of the disease. Despite this tremendous success, there are limitations attributed to the use of prostate specific antigen (PSA) as a means to screen and detect prostate cancer. PSA, as its name implies, is not specific for prostate cancer and as such is often found elevated in other prostatic diseases/symptoms associated with the aging male. Clearly, more specific marker(s) that could identify which individuals actually have prostate cancer and differentiate them from those without the disease would be of tremendous value. The search for more accurate and clinically useful biomarkers of prostate cancer has been extensive. This has focused on individual markers, as well as groups of markers. Included among these are PSA isoforms, pathological indicators and stains, nucleic acids and others. This article highlights the discovery of PSA as a first blood‐based biomarker for prostate cancer detection, as well as other molecular biomarkers and their potential application in detection of the disease. J. Cell. Biochem. 108: 3–9, 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Gene targeting to the stroma of the prostate and bone

Abstract Stromal–epithelial interactions mediated by paracrine signaling mechanisms dictate prostate development and progression of prostate cancer. The regulatory role of androgens in both the prostate stromal and epithelial compartments set the prostate apart from many other organs and tissues with regard to gene targeting. The identification of androgen-dependent prostate epithelial promoters has allowed successful gene targeting to the prostate epithelial compartment. Currently, there are no transgenic mouse models available to specifically alter gene expression within the prostate stromal compartment. As a primary metastatic site for prostate cancer is bone, the functional dissection of the bone stromal compartment is important for understanding stromal–epithelial interactions associated with metastatic tumor growth. Use of currently available methodologies for the expression or deletion of gene expression in recent research studies has advanced our understanding of the stroma. However, the complexity of stromal heterogeneity within the prostate remains a challenge to obtaining compartment or cell-lineage-specific in vivo models necessary for furthering our understanding of prostatic developmental, benign, tumorigenic, and metastatic growth.     

La fluorocholine(18F) a une utilité clinique dans le cancer de la prostate et le carcinome hépatocellulaire… parfois chez le même malade

Case reportIn order to stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), a patient was referred to PET/CT using fluorodeoxyglucose(18F) (FDG) and, if necessary, fluorocholine(18F) (FCH). HCC was proven by biopsy of a hepatic mass discovered on CT performed for a biological recurrence of prostate cancer.ResultFDG PET/CT did not show any anomaly. FCH PET/CT was thus performed and showed various foci: the hepatic mass, a large abdominal adenopathy and an unexpected subcentimetre lung nodule. The diagnostic uncertainty mostly concerned this lung nodule which was biopsied and consisted of a metastasis of the prostate cancer. Due to the presence of two metastatic cancers, the patient's management was altered, with chemotherapy for the HCC and hormone therapy for the prostate cancer.ConclusionSeveral types of cancer take-up fluorocholine(18F), which is a powerful tool to detect metastases, in particular in case of rising levels of marker with a negative FDG PET/CT. Even when FDG PET/CT is positive, FCH may reveal unexpected foci with other metabolic characteristics, although it is not specific of a given primary cancer, as well as FDG. For staging of HCC, we thus recommend to perform PET/CT with both tracers.     

Magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer radiotherapy

For radiotherapy of prostate cancer, MRI is used increasingly for delineation of the prostate gland. For focal treatment of low-risk prostate cancer or focal dose escalation for intermediate and high-risk cancer, delineation of the tumor is also required. While multi-parametric MRI is well established for detection of tumors and for staging of the disease, delineation of the tumor inside the prostate is not common practice.Guidelines, such as the PI-RADS classification, exist for tumor detection and staging, but no such guidelines are available for tumor delineation. Indeed, interobserver studies show substantial variation in tumor contours. Computer-aided tumor detection and delineation may help improve the robustness of the interpretation of multi-parametric MRI data. Comparing the performance of an earlier developed model for tumor segmentation with expert delineations, we found a significant correlation between tumor probability in a voxel and the number of experts identifying this voxel as tumor. This suggests that the model agrees with ‘the wisdom of the crowd’, and thus could serve as a reference for individual physicians in their decision making.With multi-parametric MRI it becomes feasible to revisit the GTV-CTV concept in radiotherapy of prostate cancer. While detection of index lesions is quite reliable, contouring variability and the low sensitivity to small lesions suggest that the remainder of the prostate should be treated as CTV. Clinical trials that investigate the options for dose differentiation, for example with dose escalation to the visible tumor or dose reduction to the CTV, are therefore warranted.     

Transrectal sonography in prostate cancer detection--our 25 years experience of implementation

Prostate cancer is a leading public health problem of male population in developed countries. Gold standard for prostate cancer diagnosis is true cut biopsy guided by transrectal ultrasound. Aim of this study was to determine sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive and negative predictive value of transrectal sonography (TRUS) in prostate cancer detection. The analysis was made for two time periods, before and after routine implementation of prostate specific antigen (PSA) in prostate cancer diagnostics. From 1984 to 1993 TRUS guided prostate biopsy was performed in 564, and from 1994 to 2008 in 5678 patients. In the second period PSA was routinely used in prostate cancer diagnostics. In the first period by TRUS we have made an exact diagnosis of prostate cancer in 18.97% of patients what was confirmed by biopsy. 4.61% ware false positive and 11.34% ware false negative. In the second period prostate cancer was recognized in 30.34% of patients, confirmed by biopsy. False positive cases ware 6.11% and false negative 29.31%. Sensitivity of transrectal sonography in the first period was 62.57%, specificity 94.2%, accuracy 86.2%, positive predictive value 80.45% and negative predictive value 87.72%. In the second period sensitivity was 50.87%, specificity 91.93%, accuracy 73.84%, positive predictive value 83.24% and negative predictive value 70.39%. Based on our experience we can conclude that prostate cancer is mostly found in the peripheral zone. Smaller tumors are hypoechoic and bigger tumors are hyperechoic. Prostate cancer lesions are impossible to differentiate from chronic prostatitis only by TRUS. Implementation of PSA has significantly decrease sensitivity, accuracy and negative predictive value of TRUS in prostate cancer detection. TRUS guided true cut biopsy is a gold standard in prostate cancer diagnostics.     

Finding the Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing: The 4Kscore Is a Novel Blood Test That Can Accurately Identify the Risk of Aggressive Prostate Cancer

Better biomarkers that can discriminate between aggressive and indolent phenotypes of prostate cancer are urgently needed. In the first 20 years of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) era, screening for prostate cancer has successfully reduced prostate cancer mortality, but has led to significant problems with overdiagnosis and overtreatment. As a result, many men are subjected to unnecessary prostate biopsies and overtreatment of indolent cancer in order to save one man from dying of prostate cancer. A novel blood test known as the 4Kscore® Test (OPKO Lab, Nashville, TN) incorporates a panel of four kallikrein protein biomarkers (total PSA, free PSA, intact PSA, and human kallikrein-related peptidase 2) and other clinical information in an algorithm that provides a percent risk for a high-grade (Gleason score ≥ 7) cancer on biopsy. In 10 peer-reviewed publications, the four kallikrein biomarkers and algorithm of the 4Kscore Test have been shown to improve the prediction not only of biopsy histopathology, but also surgical pathology and occurrence of aggressive, metastatic disease. Recently, a blinded prospective trial of the 4Kscore Test was conducted across the United States among 1012 men. The 4Kscore Test replicated previous European results showing accuracy in predicting biopsy outcome of Gleason score ≥ 7. In a recent case-control study nested within a population-based cohort from Västerbotten, Sweden, the four kallikrein biomarkers of the 4Kscore Test also predicted the risk for aggressive prostate cancer that metastasized within 20 years after the test was administered. These results indicate that men with an abnormal PSA or digital rectal examination result, and for whom an initial or repeat prostate biopsy is being considered, would benefit from a reflex 4Kscore Test to add important information to the clinical decision-making process. A high-risk 4Kscore Test result may be used to select men with a high probability of aggressive prostate cancer who would benefit from a biopsy of the prostate to prevent an adverse and potentially lethal outcome from prostate cancer. Men with a low 4Kscore Test result may safely defer biopsy.Key words: Prostate cancer, Biomarker, High-grade prostate cancer, ScreeningProstate cancer is the most common cancer in men in the United States, accounting for an estimated 27% of all newly diagnosed cancers in 2014.¹ Since the advent of screening for prostate cancer with serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA), we have seen a significant decline in prostate cancer mortality.¹ Randomized clinical trials have reported a 20% to 40% reduction in death from prostate cancer in men undergoing routine screening compared with those who are not screened.^2,3 However, these trials, and a trial showing little difference between opportunistic and systematic screening,⁴ have raised the concern for overdiagnosis and overtreatment of indolent prostate cancer. The fundamental concern is that an overwhelming number of men are subjected to interventions such as prostate biopsy in order to prevent one man’s death from prostate cancer.^2,3Prostate biopsy is an invasive procedure with significant complications, such as bleeding, urinary retention, and life-threatening infection. A recent population-based study from Ontario, Canada, revealed a fourfold increase to 4.1% for the rate of hospital admissions after prostate biopsy from 1996 to 2005, with 72% of admissions being due to infection.⁵ These risks, combined with the enormous anxiety involved in undergoing the procedure, present a significant burden to any man considering prostate cancer screening.Today, most men diagnosed with prostate cancer have a tumor that is unlikely to pose a threat to their life expectancies. A recent systematic analysis suggested that up to 60% of prostate cancers diagnosed in contemporary studies can be safely observed without a need for immediate intervention.⁶ However, in the United States, because of the concern for possible undergrading of prostate cancer due to biopsy sampling error, 90% of men diagnosed with prostate cancer undergo treatment and approximately 66% will be confirmed to have indolent Gleason score 6 prostate cancer,⁷ suggesting a significant problem with overtreatment. Although treatment for localized prostate cancer provides excellent cancer control,^8,9 it comes at a significant detriment to health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Previous studies have reported significant changes in HRQoL after primary treatment for prostate cancer, primarily in the domains of sexual and urinary function and bother.^10–12 Given the physical and psychological burden of these secondary adverse events, many government agencies and patients are beginning to question the risks and benefits of prostate cancer screening and treatment.¹³The United States Preventive Services Task Force recently advised against routine screening for prostate cancer, claiming that the risks of screening outweigh the benefits.¹³ However, 20% to 30% of men who are diagnosed with prostate cancer are found to have high-grade disease at presentation¹⁴; without screening, these men would lose their opportunity for cure. It is clear that new biomarkers or tests that promote the detection of both indolent and aggressive prostate cancer are unlikely to be helpful. We need tests that focus on the detection of aggressive tumors, not the indolent ones that are better left alone. Aggressive prostate cancer, for purposes of this review, is defined as cancer with a Gleason score ≥ 7 and tumors that are most likely to progress to metastatic disease and death. Targeted detection of aggressive prostate cancer would allow urologists to diagnose and treat those men most likely to benefit from aggressive intervention to avoid premature death. Conversely, those men harboring non-life-threatening disease would be able to avoid unnecessary interventions. The 4Kscore® Test (OPKO Lab, Nashville, TN) is a new blood test that accurately identifies the risk of aggressive prostate cancer. The 4Kscore Test plays an important clinical role as a reflex test prior to proceeding with initial prostate biopsy in men with an elevated PSA level or abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) results, or after a prior negative biopsy and persistently abnormal PSA levels.     

DNA damage phenotype and prostate cancer risk

The capacity of an individual to process DNA damage is considered a crucial factor in carcinogenesis. The comet assay is a phenotypic measure of the combined effects of sensitivity to a mutagen exposure and repair capacity. In this paper, we evaluate the association of the DNA repair kinetics, as measured by the comet assay, with prostate cancer risk. In a pilot study of 55 men with prostate cancer, 53 men without the disease, and 71 men free of cancer at biopsy, we investigated the association of DNA damage with prostate cancer risk at early (0-15 min) and later (15-45 min) stages following gamma-radiation exposure. Although residual damage within 45 min was the same for all groups (65% of DNA in comet tail disappeared), prostate cancer cases had a slower first phase (38% vs. 41%) and faster second phase (27% vs. 22%) of the repair response compared to controls. When subjects were categorized into quartiles, according to efficiency of repairing DNA damage, high repair-efficiency within the first 15 min after exposure was not associated with prostate cancer risk while higher at the 15-45 min period was associated with increased risk (OR for highest-to-lowest quartiles=3.24, 95% CI=0.98-10.66, p-trend=0.04). Despite limited sample size, our data suggest that DNA repair kinetics marginally differ between prostate cancer cases and controls. This small difference could be associated with differential responses to DNA damage among susceptible individuals.