ArticleExperimental hematology & oncology2019
An expanded biomarker panel for the detection of prostate cancer from urine DNA.
Article in Experimental hematology & oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Years 2015-2025 as a Prospective Decade for the Identification of Specific Methylation Biomarkers of Prostate Cancer.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Circulating Tumor DNA in Prostate Cancer: A Dual Perspective on Early Detection and Advanced Disease Management.Cancers · 2025Review
- PCaseek: ultraspecific urinary tumor DNA detection using deep learning for prostate cancer diagnosis and Gleason grading.Cell discovery · 2024Article
- Biomarkers for Pre-Treatment Risk Stratification of Prostate Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2024Review
- Cell-free DNA in the management of prostate cancer: Current status and future prospective.Asian journal of urology · 2023Review
- Liquid Biopsy in Diagnosis and Prognosis of Non-Metastatic Prostate Cancer.Biomedicines · 2022Review
- Current and future applications of biomarkers in samples collected through minimally invasive methods for cancer medicine and population-based research.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2022Review
- Beyond liquid biopsy: Toward non-invasive assays for distanced cancer diagnostics in pandemics.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2022Review
- A Multiplexable Plasmonic Hairpin-DNA Sensor Based On Target-specific Tether Dynamics.ACS sensors · 2021Article
- Clinical Relevance of Circulating Tumor Cells in Prostate Cancer Management.Biomedicines · 2021Review
- Non-invasive detection of endometrial cancer by DNA methylation analysis in urine.Clinical epigenetics · 2020Article
- Differential expression profiles of circRNAs in human prostate cancer based on chip and bioinformatic analysis.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2020Article
- Development of human prostate cancer stem cells involves epigenomic alteration and PI3K/AKT pathway activation.Experimental hematology & oncology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer diagnosis using the PSA test remains controversial because of overdiagnosis and overtreatment of potentially indolent cancers. There remains a need to increase the diagnostic lead time and to target treatment to patients with significant disease. One possible approach to overcome the limitations of PSA is to screen men for the molecular signature of early PCA, monitor the rate of disease progression and target treatment to patients who are likely to benefit from it. Such an approach requires a large panel of markers that define a molecular clock for PCA. We recently developed a panel of 19 markers for the non-invasive detection of PCA from urine DNA. It raised the possibility that additional methylation markers could be successfully analyzed from urine DNA, a prerequisite for increasing the diagnostic lead time and enabling disease monitoring.
methodsWe developed semi-quantitative polymerase chain reaction assays for 13 additional markers and determined their methylation status in 150 urine DNAs from 94 patients with elevated PSA. Eighty five samples were obtained following DRE and 65 samples were from first void. We combined the data of the 13 new markers with the previously reported 19 markers and calculated the sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values at every threshold from one to 32 positive markers.
resultsUsing 10of32 positive markers as the threshold to recommend a biopsy yields a sensitivity of 81% (95% CI 0.68-0.93) and 93% (95% CI 0.84-1.02) and a specificity of 76% (95% CI 0.63-0.88) and 77% (95% CI 0.63-0.91) from DRE and FV DNA, respectively. The PPV was 71% and 77% and the NPV was 85% and 93% from DRE and FV, respectively.
conclusionsThis study shows that large marker panels can be analyzed from urine DNA without loss of sensitivity or specificity. Using 32 markers improved the stratification of patients undergoing screening for PCA particularly for patients below the 10of32 threshold. The results show the utility of larger biomarker panels for PCA diagnosis and suggest that the development of the panels needed to monitor disease progression could be successfully accomplished.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.