BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is a common cancer in men. Detection methods include the measurement of biomarkers: prostate-specific antigen (PSA), free PSA, [-2]proPSA, and the calculated indices: fPSA/tPSA ratio and Prostate Health Index (PHI). Proper preanalytical conditions are crucial for precise measurement and failure to adhere to protocols or regulations can influence the diagnostic algorithm. We assessed the stability of the above-mentioned biomarkers, fPSA/tPSA ratio and PHI, under various pre-analytical conditions. METHODS: Serum samples from 45 males were collected and stored under specific conditions before tPSA, fPSA, and [-2]proPSA were measured. Subsequently, the fPSA/tPSA and PHI were calculated. RESULTS: tPSA, fPSA, and [-2]proPSA remained stable during the two freeze-thaw cycles. Storage at 4°C and 22°C resulted in stable tPSA concentrations. However, fPSA levels decreased and [-2]proPSA levels increased over time. The fPSA/tPSA ratio remained stable for 72 h, at which point a decrease was observed in the samples kept at 4°C and 22°C. A gradual increase in PHI was observed in the samples kept at 4°C and 22°C. CONCLUSIONS: All biomarkers remained stable during two freeze-thaw cycles. tPSA was the most stable analyte when stored at 4°C, as well as at RT. A gradual increase of [-2]proPSA and a slight decrease in fPSA were observed during the storage test. This led to a decrease in the fPSA/tPSA ratio and an elevation in the PHI. We therefore recommend measuring prostate biomarkers promptly following blood collection. IMPACT: Understanding the pre-analytical stability of prostate biomarkers helps prevent false positive results and improve the accuracy of diagnostics for prostate cancer.

Department of Immunochemistry Diagnostics University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen Charles University Pilsen Czech Republic

Department of Medical Chemistry and Biochemistry Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen Charles University Pilsen Czech Republic

Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen Charles University Pilsen Czech Republic

Faculty of Science c Palacky University in Olomou Olomouc Czech Republic

See more in PubMed

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209‐249. doi:10.3322/caac.21660

Giona S. Prostate cancer. In: SRJ Bott, KL Ng, eds. The epidemiology of prostate cancer, 2021.

Pron G. Prostate‐specific antigen (PSA)‐based population screening for prostate cancer: an evidence‐based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2015;15(10):1‐64.

Ng KL. Prostate cancer. In: Bott SRJ, Ng KL., eds. The etiology of prostate cancer, 2021.

Balk SP, Ko YJ, Bubley GJ. Biology of prostate‐specific antigen. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(2):383‐391. doi:10.1200/JCO.2003.02.083

Kim J, Coetzee GA. Prostate specific antigen gene regulation by androgen receptor. J Cell Biochem. 2004;93(2):233‐241. doi:10.1002/jcb.20228

Dabbs DJ, Dabbs DJ. ScienceDirect. Diagnostic immunohistochemistry: theranostic and genomic applications. Saunders; 2010.

DasGupta A, Wahed A. Elsevier. Clinical chemistry, immunology and laboratory quality control: a comprehensive review for board preparation, certification and clinical practice. Elsevier; 2014.

Saini S. PSA and beyond: alternative prostate cancer biomarkers. Cell Oncol. 2016;39(2):97‐106. doi:10.1007/s13402-016-0268-6

Simanek V, Topolcan O, Karlikova M, et al. Stability of total prostate‐specific antigen and free prostate‐specific antigen after 10 years' storage. Int J Biol Markers. 2018;33(4):463‐466. doi:10.1177/1724600818789414

Hou GD, Zheng Y, Zheng WX, et al. A novel nomogram predicting the risk of positive biopsy for patients in the diagnostic gray area of prostate cancer. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):17675. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-74703-8

Filella X, Giménez N. Evaluation of [−2] proPSA and Prostate Health Index (phi) for the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2013;51(4):729‐739. doi:10.1515/cclm-2012-0410

Romero Otero J, Garcia Gomez B, Campos Juanatey F, Touijer KA. Prostate cancer biomarkers: an update. Urol Oncol Semin Orig Investig. 2014;32(3):252‐260. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2013.09.017

Loeb S, Catalona WJ. The Prostate Health Index: a new test for the detection of prostate cancer. Ther Adv Urol. 2014;6(2):74‐77. doi:10.1177/1756287213513488

Narayanan S. The preanalytic phase. An important component of laboratory medicine. Am J Clin Path. 2000;113(3):429‐452. doi:10.1309/C0NM-Q7R0-LL2E-B3UY

Campbell LD, Astrin JJ, DeSouza Y, et al. The 2018 revision of the ISBER best practices: summary of changes and the Editorial Team's Development Process. Biopreserv Biobank. 2018;16(1):3‐6. doi:10.1089/bio.2018.0001

Betsou F, Gunter E, Clements J, et al. Identification of evidence‐based biospecimen quality‐control tools. J Mol Diagn. 2013;15(1):3‐16. doi:10.1016/j.jmoldx.2012.06.008

ISBER. SOP for sample stability test. 2015. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.isber.org/resource/resmgr/documents/STABCALC-SOP.pdf

Su L‐M, Su L‐M, Meloni D, et al. Prostate cancer. Saunders. Elsevier; 2010.

Sedláčková H, Dolejšová O, Hora M, et al. Prostate cancer diagnostic algorithm as a “road map” from the first stratification of the patient to the final treatment decision. Life. 2021;11(4):324. doi:10.3390/life11040324

Dolejsova O, Kucera R, Fuchsova R, et al. The ability of Prostate Health Index (PHI) to predict gleason score in patients with prostate cancer and discriminate patients between gleason score 6 and Gleason Score Higher than 6‐A study on 320 patients after radical prostatectomy. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2018;17:153303381878737. doi:10.1177/1533033818787377

EAU. EAU Guidelines. Edn. presented at the EAU Annual Congress Milan 2023; 2023.

Ranganathan P, Pramesh C, Buyse M. Common pitfalls in statistical analysis: clinical versus statistical significance. Perspect Clin Res. 2015;6(3):169‐170. doi:10.4103/2229-3485.159943

Schober P, Bossers SM, Schwarte LA. Statistical significance versus clinical importance of observed effect sizes: what do P values and confidence intervals really represent? Anesth Analg. 2018;126(3):1068‐1072. doi:10.1213/ANE.0000000000002798

BECKMAN COULTER. Access Hybritech PSA. 2022. https://www.beckmancoulter.com/download/file/phxA85067R-EN_US/A85067R?type=pdf

BECKMAN COULTER. Access Hybritech free PSA. 2020. https://www.beckmancoulter.com/download/file/phxA37447P-EN_US/A37447P?type=pdf

BECKMAN COULTER. Access Hybritech free p2PSA. 2020. https://www.beckmancoulter.com/download/file/phxA80984N-EN_US/A80984N?type=pdf

Semjonow A, Köpke T, Eltze E, Pepping‐Schefers B, Bürgel H, Darte C. Pre‐analytical in‐vitro stability of [−2]proPSA in blood and serum. Clin Biochem. 2010;43(10‐11):926‐928. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2010.04.062

Igawa T, Takehara K, Onita T, Ito K, Sakai H. Stability of [−2]Pro‐PSA in whole blood and serum: analysis for optimal measurement conditions. J Clin Lab Anal. 2014;28(4):315‐319. doi:10.1002/jcla.21687

Piironen T, Pettersson K, Suonpää M, et al. In vitro stability of free prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) and prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) complexed to α1‐antichymotrypsin in blood samples. Urology. 1996;48(6A suppl):81‐87. doi:10.1016/s0090-4295(96)00616-4

Forde JC, Blake O, Crowley VE, Lynch TH. Stability and accuracy of total and free PSA values in samples stored at room temperature. Irish J Med Sci. 2016;185(4):989‐991. doi:10.1007/s11845-015-1364-8

Snapes E, Simeon‐Dubach D. ISBER best practices for repositories, moving toward the fifth edition. Biopreserv Biobank. 2022;20(1):107‐108. doi:10.1089/bio.2022.29102.ejs

Vrzáková R, Šimánek V, Topolčan O, Vurm V, Slouka D, Kučera R. The stability of the anti‐Müllerian hormone in serum and plasma samples under various preanalytical conditions. Diagnostics. 2023;13(8):1501. doi:10.3390/diagnostics13081501

Sokoll LJ, Bruzek DJ, Dua R, et al. Short‐term stability of the molecular forms of prostate‐specific antigen and effect on percent complexed prostate‐specific antigen and percent free prostate‐specific antigen. Urology. 2002;60(4 suppl 1):24‐30. doi:10.1016/s0090-4295(02)01723-5

Cartledge JJ, Thompson D, Verril H, Clarkson E. The stability of free and bound prostate‐specific antigen. BJU Int. 1999;84(7):810‐814. doi:10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00311.x

Hori S, Blanchet JS, McLoughlin J. From prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) to precursor PSA (proPSA) isoforms: a review of the emerging role of proPSAs in the detection and management of early prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2013;112(6):717‐728. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11329.x

Mikolajczyk SD, Marks LS, Partin AW, Rittenhouse HG. Free prostate‐specific antigen in serum is becoming more complex. Urology. 2002;59(6):797‐802. doi:10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01605-3

Anyango R, Ojwando J, Mwita C, Mugalo E. Diagnostic accuracy of [−2]proPSA versus Gleason score and Prostate Health Index versus gleason score for the determination of aggressive prostate cancer: a systematic review. JBI Evid Syn. 2021;19(6):1263‐1291. doi:10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00194

Serum levels of prostate specific antigen, free PSA, [-2]proPSA, fPSA/tPSA ratio, Prostate Health Index, and glycosylation patterns of free PSA in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia pharmacotherapy