Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36246565›Full record

ArticleDisease markers2022

Urinary PCA3 a Superior Diagnostic Biomarker for Prostate Cancer among Ghanaian Men.

Bismark Opoku Mensah, Linda Ahenkorah Fondjo, W K B A Owiredu, Ben Adusei

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Disease markers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Precision medicine in prostate cancer: individualized treatment through radiomics, genomics, and biomarkers.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Advances in Prostate Cancer Biomarkers and Probes.Cyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.) · 2024
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Advancements in Biomarkers of Prostate Cancer: A Review.Technology in cancer research & treatment
    Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bismark Opoku MensahDepartment of Molecular Medicine, KSMD, KNUST, Ghana.
Linda Ahenkorah FondjoDepartment of Molecular Medicine, KSMD, KNUST, Ghana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0252-3190
W K B A OwireduDepartment of Molecular Medicine, KSMD, KNUST, Ghana.
Ben AduseiUrology Unit, 37 Military Hospital, Accra, Ghana.
Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology · GH37 Military Hospital · GH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Prostate cancer is one of the most commonly diagnosed cancers in men. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has been the biomarker of choice for screening and diagnosis of prostate cancer. However, inefficiencies exist with its diagnostic capabilities. This study thus evaluated the diagnostic and prognostic potential of urinary PCA3 as an alternative biomarker for prostate cancer in the Ghanaian population. Methods: A hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted at the Urology Department of the 37 Military Hospital, Accra, Ghana. A total of 237 participants aged 40 years and above with any form of suspected prostate disorder were recruited into the study after written informed consent was obtained. Total serum PSA levels was measured using the electrochemiluminescence method and transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic core needle biopsies were obtained from each study participant. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis was used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracies of serum PSA, DRE, and PCA3 as diagnostic tools for prostate cancer. These three diagnostic tools were also evaluated in various combinations to ascertain the combinations with the best diagnostic accuracy. Results: Prostate cancer was diagnosed in 26.6% of the participants. Benign prostate hyperplasia and prostatitis were diagnosed in 48.5% and 24.9% participants, respectively. DRE had a sensitivity of 93.7% and a specificity of 12.1%. PSA had a sensitivity of 92.1% and a specificity of 16.1%. PCA3 had a sensitivity of 57.1% and a specificity of 85.6% and showed a better accuracy (AUC = 83.0) compared to PSA (AUC = 60.0) and DRE (AUC = 65.0) as individual diagnostic tools. The combination of DRE+PCA3 score had the best diagnostic accuracy (AUC = 0.80) with a sensitivity and specificity of 60.3% and 80.5%, respectively. Conclusion: The urinary PCA3 assay showed a better diagnostic performance compared to serum PSA and DRE. PCA3 as a stand-alone and in combination with DRE could be a suitable complimentary marker in diagnosis and management of prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Prostate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsAntigens, NeoplasmBiomarkers, TumorBiopsyCross-Sectional StudiesGhanaHumansMaleProstateAntigens, NeoplasmBiomarkers, Tumorprostate cancer antigen 3, humanProstate-Specific Antigen

Identifiers

PMID36246565
PMCPMC9568348
OpenAlexW4303457079

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.