Stefan Plas , Felix Melchior , Gerhard P. Aigner , Maria Frantzi , Jan Pencik , Mona Kafka , Isabel Heidegger
{"title":"The impact of urine biomarkers for prostate cancer detection–A systematic state of the art review","authors":"Stefan Plas , Felix Melchior , Gerhard P. Aigner , Maria Frantzi , Jan Pencik , Mona Kafka , Isabel Heidegger","doi":"10.1016/j.critrevonc.2025.104699","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Prostate cancer (PCa) screening primarily relies on Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA), which has low specificity and therefore leads to unnecessary biopsies. Consequently, there is a growing need for, ideally, non-invasive biomarkers. Liquid biopsy, a diagnostic approach analyzing circulating tumor components in body fluids, has emerged as a promising diagnostic tool for various cancers, including PCa.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>To evaluate recent evidence on urine-based biomarkers for the detection of PCa, we conducted a systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Our literature search identified a total of 286 studies, of which 66 met our inclusion criteria (men suspected of PCa with no prior history of PCa). After assessing the risk of bias using the QUADAS-2 tool, studies on five distinct urinary biomarker tests were included for further analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Tests that do not rely on digital rectal examination (non-DRE), such as Exosome Dx Prostate IntelliScore (EPI) and Protexam Prostate Status Management (PSM)/Prostate Check-Up (PSU), demonstrated strong performance in detecting PCa, particularly clinically significant PCa. Meanwhile, the MyProstateScore test (MPS) showed the highest efficacy among tests utilizing urine samples collected post-DRE. Unfortunately, the performance of the biomarker test with the most available studies, PCA3 ProGensa® Score, was underwhelming with only moderate sensitivity and specificity.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Despite promising results from various urine-based biomarker tests, we are currently unable to recommend one specific test for implementation into clinical practice. The broad heterogeneity of the studies conducted hindered the ability to perform a meta-analysis, and prospective randomized trials providing clinical evidence are still lacking.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11358,"journal":{"name":"Critical reviews in oncology/hematology","volume":"210 ","pages":"Article 104699"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical reviews in oncology/hematology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1040842825000873","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Prostate cancer (PCa) screening primarily relies on Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA), which has low specificity and therefore leads to unnecessary biopsies. Consequently, there is a growing need for, ideally, non-invasive biomarkers. Liquid biopsy, a diagnostic approach analyzing circulating tumor components in body fluids, has emerged as a promising diagnostic tool for various cancers, including PCa.
Methods
To evaluate recent evidence on urine-based biomarkers for the detection of PCa, we conducted a systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Our literature search identified a total of 286 studies, of which 66 met our inclusion criteria (men suspected of PCa with no prior history of PCa). After assessing the risk of bias using the QUADAS-2 tool, studies on five distinct urinary biomarker tests were included for further analysis.
Results
Tests that do not rely on digital rectal examination (non-DRE), such as Exosome Dx Prostate IntelliScore (EPI) and Protexam Prostate Status Management (PSM)/Prostate Check-Up (PSU), demonstrated strong performance in detecting PCa, particularly clinically significant PCa. Meanwhile, the MyProstateScore test (MPS) showed the highest efficacy among tests utilizing urine samples collected post-DRE. Unfortunately, the performance of the biomarker test with the most available studies, PCA3 ProGensa® Score, was underwhelming with only moderate sensitivity and specificity.
Conclusions
Despite promising results from various urine-based biomarker tests, we are currently unable to recommend one specific test for implementation into clinical practice. The broad heterogeneity of the studies conducted hindered the ability to perform a meta-analysis, and prospective randomized trials providing clinical evidence are still lacking.
期刊介绍:
Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology publishes scholarly, critical reviews in all fields of oncology and hematology written by experts from around the world. Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology is the Official Journal of the European School of Oncology (ESO) and the International Society of Liquid Biopsy.