ArticleWorld journal of urology2010
Use of a combination of biomarkers in serum and urine to improve detection of prostate cancer.
Article in World journal of urology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Role of the Metzincin Superfamily in Prostate Cancer Progression: A Systematic-Like Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Pooled it
- The association between RASSF1A promoter methylation and prostate cancer: evidence from 19 published studies.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2014Pooled it
- The Potential of Extracellular Matrix- and Integrin Adhesion Complex-Related Molecules for Prostate Cancer Biomarker Discovery.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Glutathione-S-TransferaseInternational journal of endocrinology · 2023Review
- Multiplexed Prostate Cancer Companion Diagnostic Devices.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- DNA-Methylation-Based Detection of Urological Cancer in Urine: Overview of Biomarkers and Considerations on Biomarker Design, Source of DNA, and Detection Technologies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Review
- Diagnosis and Prognosis of Prostate Cancer from Circulating Matrix Metalloproteinases and Inhibitors.Journal of aging research · 2018Review
- Recent advances towards tuberculosis control: vaccines and biomarkers.Journal of internal medicine · 2014Review
- The present and future of prostate cancer urine biomarkers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2013Review
- Genetic variations of α -methylacyl-CoA racemase are associated with sporadic prostate cancer risk in ethnically homogenous Koreans.BioMed research international · 2013Article
- Age-specific PCA3 score reference values for diagnosis of prostate cancer.World journal of urology · 2012Article
- Evaluating the PCPT risk calculator in ten international biopsy cohorts: results from the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group.World journal of urology · 2012Article
- Quadriplex model enhances urine-based detection of prostate cancer.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2011Article
- A novel multiplex assay combining autoantibodies plus PSA has potential implications for classification of prostate cancer from non-malignant cases.Journal of translational medicine · 2011Article
- Urine markers and prostate cancer.Central European journal of urology · 2011Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo measure a combination of novel molecular biomarkers in urine/blood samples of consecutive patients referring lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) not previously diagnosed, to improve prostate cancer diagnosis.
methodsSerum and urine samples from 113 men who went consecutively to the Department of Urology of our Institution. Biomarkers analyzed were AMACR and MMP-2 levels, and GSTP1/RASSF1A methylation status, in addition to PSA levels. Sensitivity, specificity, area under the ROC (AUROC) curves, and discriminant function analysis were assessed to determine the diagnostic potential of each variable alone or in combination.
resultsOf the patients, 30.08% had PCa and the remaining ones were tumor free. Areas under the ROC (AUROC) curves were as follows: 0.476 for PSA, 0.532 for AMACR, and 0.706 for MMP-2. Sensitivity and specificity for methylation status were 53.3 and 45.9%, respectively. The combination of these biomarkers resulted in an AUROC curve of 0.788, which significantly outperformed AUROC curves for PSA (P = 0.0033) and AMACR (P = 0.0375). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for the combination of biomarkers were 57.1, 96.6, 88.9, and 82.4%, respectively.
conclusionWe conclude that analysis of this biomarker combination in body fluids improves very significantly the diagnosis of PCa compared to the PSA test.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20632177What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.