Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28520829›Full record

ArticleJAMA oncology2017

Association Between Combined TMPRSS2:ERG and PCA3 RNA Urinary Testing and Detection of Aggressive Prostate Cancer.

Martin G Sanda, Ziding Feng, David H Howard, Scott A Tomlins, Lori J Sokoll, Daniel W Chan, Meredith M Regan, Jack Groskopf, Jonathan Chipman, Dattatraya H Patil and 19 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 90 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
90citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
14.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

90 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 155 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Prostate cancer detection: a systematic review of urinary biosensors.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Diagnosis accuracy of PCA3 level in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review with meta-analysis.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
    Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Prostate cancer biomarkers: from early diagnosis to precision treatment.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024
    Review

30 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

29 authors at 16 institutions in 1 country.

Martin G SandaDepartment of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.
Ziding FengDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
David H HowardDepartment of Biostatistics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Scott A TomlinsDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Lori J SokollDepartment of Pathology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland.
Daniel W ChanDepartment of Pathology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland.
Meredith M ReganDepartment of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jack GroskopfHologic Inc, San Diego, California.
Jonathan ChipmanDepartment of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Dattatraya H PatilDepartment of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.
Simpa S SalamiHofstra North Shore-LIJ School of Medicine, The Arthur Smith Institute for Urology, New Hyde Park, New York.
Douglas S ScherrDepartment of Urology, Weill-Cornell Medical Center, New York, New York.
Jacob KaganDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
Sudhir SrivastavaDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
Ian M ThompsonUniversity of Texas Health Sciences Center - San Antonio, Texas.
Javed SiddiquiMichigan Center for Translational Pathology, Department of Pathology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Jing FanLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, California.
Aron Y JoonDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Leonidas E BantisDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Mark A RubinDepartment of Pathology, Weill-Cornell Medical Center, New York, New York.
Arul M ChinnayianDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
John T WeiDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
and the EDRN-PCA3 Study Group
Mohamed BidairSan Diego Clinical Trials, San Diego, California.
Adam KibelBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Daniel W LinUniversity of Washington Medical Center, Seattle.
Yair LotanUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Alan PartinJohns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland.
Samir TanejaNew York University School of Medicine, New York.
University of Michigan · USEmory University · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USCornell University · USHarvard University · USJohns Hopkins Hospital · USJohns Hopkins University · USNational Cancer Institute · USArthur Smith Institute for Urology · USHologic (United States) · USLos Angeles Clinical Trials · USMount Sinai Hospital · USNew York University · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · USUniversity of Washington Medical Center · US

Funding

The Early Detection Research Network: Data Management and Coordinating CenterU24CA086368 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI RUTH D ETZIONI, Ziding Feng · 2010 to 2026
$75.7M
Prostate Cancer Biomarker and Imaging Validation Alliance: Emory University, University of Alabama Birmingham, and University of Texas SouthwesternU01CA113913 · NCI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Martin G. Sanda · 2005 to 2026
$16.4M
Clinical and Analytical Validation of Cancer BiomarkersU24CA115102 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI CHAN, DANIEL WANYUI · 2005 to 2021
$7.4M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA113913NCI NIH HHS U24 CA086368NCI NIH HHS U24 CA115102
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importancePotential survival benefits from treating aggressive (Gleason score, ≥7) early-stage prostate cancer are undermined by harms from unnecessary prostate biopsy and overdiagnosis of indolent disease.

objectiveTo evaluate the a priori primary hypothesis that combined measurement of PCA3 and TMPRSS2:ERG (T2:ERG) RNA in the urine after digital rectal examination would improve specificity over measurement of prostate-specific antigen alone for detecting cancer with Gleason score of 7 or higher. As a secondary objective, to evaluate the potential effect of such urine RNA testing on health care costs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsProspective, multicenter diagnostic evaluation and validation in academic and community-based ambulatory urology clinics. Participants were a referred sample of men presenting for first-time prostate biopsy without preexisting prostate cancer: 516 eligible participants from among 748 prospective cohort participants in the developmental cohort and 561 eligible participants from 928 in the validation cohort. INTERVENTIONS/EXPOSURES: Urinary PCA3 and T2:ERG RNA measurement before prostate biopsy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Presence of prostate cancer having Gleason score of 7 or higher on prostate biopsy. Pathology testing was blinded to urine assay results. In the developmental cohort, a multiplex decision algorithm was constructed using urine RNA assays to optimize specificity while maintaining 95% sensitivity for predicting aggressive prostate cancer at initial biopsy. Findings were validated in a separate multicenter cohort via prespecified analysis, blinded per prospective-specimen-collection, retrospective-blinded-evaluation (PRoBE) criteria. Cost effects of the urinary testing strategy were evaluated by modeling observed biopsy results and previously reported treatment outcomes.

resultsAmong the 516 men in the developmental cohort (mean age, 62 years; range, 33-85 years) combining testing of urinary T2:ERG and PCA3 at thresholds that preserved 95% sensitivity for detecting aggressive prostate cancer improved specificity from 18% to 39%. Among the 561 men in the validation cohort (mean age, 62 years; range, 27-86 years), analysis confirmed improvement in specificity (from 17% to 33%; lower bound of 1-sided 95% CI, 0.73%; prespecified 1-sided P = .04), while high sensitivity (93%) was preserved for aggressive prostate cancer detection. Forty-two percent of unnecessary prostate biopsies would have been averted by using the urine assay results to select men for biopsy. Cost analysis suggested that this urinary testing algorithm to restrict prostate biopsy has greater potential cost-benefit in younger men. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Combined urinary testing for T2:ERG and PCA3 can avert unnecessary biopsy while retaining robust sensitivity for detecting aggressive prostate cancer with consequent potential health care cost savings.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntigens, NeoplasmBiomarkers, TumorCosts and Cost AnalysisHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingOncogene Proteins, FusionProstatic NeoplasmsRNAUrinalysisAntigens, NeoplasmBiomarkers, TumorOncogene Proteins, Fusionprostate cancer antigen 3, humanRNATMPRSS2-ERG fusion protein, human

Identifiers

PMID28520829
PMCPMC5710334
OpenAlexW2754426562

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.