• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Diagnostic Accuracy of Liquid Biomarkers for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Meta-analysis of Multiple Thresholds

T. Kawada, SR. Shim, F. Quhal, P. Rajwa, B. Pradere, T. Yanagisawa, K. Bekku, E. Laukhtina, M. von Deimling, JY. Teoh, PI. Karakiewicz, M. Araki, SF. Shariat

. 2024 ; 7 (4) : 649-662. [pub] 20231118

Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, systematický přehled, metaanalýza, přehledy

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc24019631

CONTEXT: Many liquid biomarkers have entered clinical practice with the praise to improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), helping avoid unnecessary prostate biopsies. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of multianalyte biomarkers for csPCa detection using multiple thresholds. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A comprehensive literature search was done through PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus in March 2023 for prospective and retrospective studies reporting the diagnostic performance of liquid biomarkers for detecting csPCa. The outcomes of interest were the diagnostic performance of liquid biomarkers for csPCa detection and identification of optimal thresholds for each biomarker. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Overall, 49 studies were eligible for this meta-analysis. Using each representative threshold based on the Youden Index, the pooled sensitivity and specificity for detecting csPCa were 0.85 and 0.37 for prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3), 0.85 and 0.52 for prostate health index (PHI), 0.87 and 0.58 for four kallikrein (4K), 0.82 and 0.56 for SelectMDx, 0.85 and 0.54 for ExoDx, and 0.82 and 0.59 for mi prostate score (MPS), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio was highest for 4K (8.84), followed by MPS (7.0) and PHI (6.28). According to the meta-analysis incorporating multiple thresholds, the corresponding sensitivity was 0.77 for 4K, 0.69 for PHI, and 0.63 for PCA3; specificity was 0.72 for PHI, 0.70 for 4K, and 0.69 for PCA3. CONCLUSIONS: Regarding the detection of csPCa, 4K had the highest diagnostic performance among the commercial liquid biomarkers. Based on the optimal thresholds calculated by the present meta-analysis, 4K had the highest sensitivity and PHI had the highest specificity for detecting csPCa. Nevertheless, clinical decision-making requires combination strategies between liquid and imaging biomarkers. PATIENT SUMMARY: Novel biomarkers for prostate cancer detection were useful for more accurate diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer to avoid unnecessary biopsies.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc24019631
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20241024110618.0
007      
ta
008      
241015s2024 ne f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/j.euo.2023.10.029 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)37981495
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a ne
100    1_
$a Kawada, Tatsushi $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
245    10
$a Diagnostic Accuracy of Liquid Biomarkers for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Meta-analysis of Multiple Thresholds / $c T. Kawada, SR. Shim, F. Quhal, P. Rajwa, B. Pradere, T. Yanagisawa, K. Bekku, E. Laukhtina, M. von Deimling, JY. Teoh, PI. Karakiewicz, M. Araki, SF. Shariat
520    9_
$a CONTEXT: Many liquid biomarkers have entered clinical practice with the praise to improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), helping avoid unnecessary prostate biopsies. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of multianalyte biomarkers for csPCa detection using multiple thresholds. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A comprehensive literature search was done through PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus in March 2023 for prospective and retrospective studies reporting the diagnostic performance of liquid biomarkers for detecting csPCa. The outcomes of interest were the diagnostic performance of liquid biomarkers for csPCa detection and identification of optimal thresholds for each biomarker. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Overall, 49 studies were eligible for this meta-analysis. Using each representative threshold based on the Youden Index, the pooled sensitivity and specificity for detecting csPCa were 0.85 and 0.37 for prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3), 0.85 and 0.52 for prostate health index (PHI), 0.87 and 0.58 for four kallikrein (4K), 0.82 and 0.56 for SelectMDx, 0.85 and 0.54 for ExoDx, and 0.82 and 0.59 for mi prostate score (MPS), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio was highest for 4K (8.84), followed by MPS (7.0) and PHI (6.28). According to the meta-analysis incorporating multiple thresholds, the corresponding sensitivity was 0.77 for 4K, 0.69 for PHI, and 0.63 for PCA3; specificity was 0.72 for PHI, 0.70 for 4K, and 0.69 for PCA3. CONCLUSIONS: Regarding the detection of csPCa, 4K had the highest diagnostic performance among the commercial liquid biomarkers. Based on the optimal thresholds calculated by the present meta-analysis, 4K had the highest sensitivity and PHI had the highest specificity for detecting csPCa. Nevertheless, clinical decision-making requires combination strategies between liquid and imaging biomarkers. PATIENT SUMMARY: Novel biomarkers for prostate cancer detection were useful for more accurate diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer to avoid unnecessary biopsies.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    12
$a nádory prostaty $x diagnóza $x krev $7 D011471
650    12
$a nádorové biomarkery $x krev $7 D014408
650    _2
$a reprodukovatelnost výsledků $7 D015203
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a systematický přehled $7 D000078182
655    _2
$a metaanalýza $7 D017418
655    _2
$a přehledy $7 D016454
700    1_
$a Shim, Sung Ryul $u Department of Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, Konyang University, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
700    1_
$a Quhal, Fahad $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, King Fahad Specialist Hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia
700    1_
$a Rajwa, Pawel $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Medical University of Silesia, Zabrze, Poland
700    1_
$a Pradere, Benjamin $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology UROSUD, La Croix Du Sud Hospital, Quint Fonsegrives, France
700    1_
$a Yanagisawa, Takafumi $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
700    1_
$a Bekku, Kensuke $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
700    1_
$a Laukhtina, Ekaterina $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
700    1_
$a von Deimling, Markus $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Teoh, Jeremy Yuen-Chun $u S.H. Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
700    1_
$a Karakiewicz, Pierre I $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
700    1_
$a Araki, Motoo $u Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
700    1_
$a Shariat, Shahrokh F $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, Canada; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; Hourani Center for Applied Scientific Research, AI-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman, Jordan; Research Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, Iranian EBM Center: A Joanna Briggs Institute Center of Excellence, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. Electronic address: shahrokh.shariat@meduniwien.ac.at
773    0_
$w MED00205913 $t European urology oncology $x 2588-9311 $g Roč. 7, č. 4 (2024), s. 649-662
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37981495 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20241015 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20241024110612 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2202083 $s 1231604
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2024 $b 7 $c 4 $d 649-662 $e 20231118 $i 2588-9311 $m European urology oncology $n Eur Urol Oncol $x MED00205913
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20241015

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace