Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32873277›Full record

ArticleBMC urology2020

A urine-based Exosomal gene expression test stratifies risk of high-grade prostate Cancer in men with prior negative prostate biopsy undergoing repeat biopsy.

James McKiernan, Mikkel Noerholm, Vasisht Tadigotla, Sonia Kumar, Phillipp Torkler, Grannum Sant, Jason Alter, Michael J Donovan, Johan Skog

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Urinary extracellular vesicles in childhood kidney diseases.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

James McKiernanColumbia University Medical Center, New York City, NY, USA.
Mikkel NoerholmExosome Diagnostics, a Bio-Techne Brand, Waltham, MA, USA.
Vasisht TadigotlaExosome Diagnostics, a Bio-Techne Brand, Waltham, MA, USA.
Sonia KumarExosome Diagnostics, a Bio-Techne Brand, Waltham, MA, USA.
Phillipp TorklerExosome Diagnostics, a Bio-Techne Brand, Waltham, MA, USA.
Grannum SantExosome Diagnostics, a Bio-Techne Brand, Waltham, MA, USA.
Jason AlterExosome Diagnostics, a Bio-Techne Brand, Waltham, MA, USA.
Michael J DonovanExosome Diagnostics, a Bio-Techne Brand, Waltham, MA, USA. Mjdonovan54@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0772-598X
Johan SkogExosome Diagnostics, a Bio-Techne Brand, Waltham, MA, USA.
Exosome Diagnostics (United States) · USColumbia University Irving Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInitial prostate biopsy often fails to identify prostate cancer resulting in patient anxiety, especially when clinical features such as prostate specific antigen (PSA) remain elevated, leading to the need for repeat biopsies. Prostate biomarker tests, such as the ExoDx™ Prostate (IntelliScore), or EPI test, have been shown to provide individualized risk assessment of clinically significant prostate cancer at initial biopsy; however, the performance in the repeat biopsy setting is not well established.

methodsAs part of a previous prospective clinical validation study evaluating the performance of the EPI test, we collected first-catch, non-DRE urine samples across 22 sites from men with at least one prior negative biopsy scheduled to undergo a repeat prostate biopsy to rule out prostate cancer. All men were 50 years or older with a PSA 2-10 ng/mL. Exosomal mRNA was extracted and expression of three genomic markers, PCA3, ERG and SPDEF was measured. The resulting EPI score was correlated with biopsy results.

results229 men with a prior negative biopsy underwent repeat biopsies. ExoDx Prostate demonstrated good performance ruling out high-grade (Grade group 2, GG2, or higher) prostate cancer (HGPCa) using the previously validated 15.6 cut point in the initial biopsy setting. The EPI test yielded an NPV of 92% independent of other clinical features and would have avoided 26% of unnecessary biopsies while missing only five patients with HGPCa (2.1%). Furthermore, the EPI test provided additional information at a cut-point of 20 and 29.6 with an NPV of 94%, potentially delaying 35 and 61% of unnecessary biopsies, respectively. AUC curves and Net Health Benefit Analyses demonstrated superior performance of ExoDx Prostate over PSA and clinical only risk calculators, i.e. ERSPC.

conclusionsThe EPI test provided good performance using the 15.6 cut-point for ruling out HGPCa / GG2 or higher in men undergoing a repeat prostate biopsy with a PSA of 2-10 ng/ml. Furthermore, the test utilizes gene expression data independent of clinical features to predict the likelihood of HGPCa / GG2 on a subsequent needle biopsy.

Indexed as

AgedBiopsyCohort StudiesExosomesGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingProstateProstatic NeoplasmsRisk AssessmentUrinalysisEarly detectionExosomesProstate biopsyProstate CancerUrine

Identifiers

PMID32873277
PMCPMC7466797
OpenAlexW3082556689

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.