ArticleThe Prostate2025
Clinical Sensitivity and Specificity of the PROSTest in an American Cohort.
Article in The Prostate, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
A Registry for Prostate Cancers
A Single-arm, Multicenter Prospective Study to Evaluate the Diagnostic Performance of PROSTest in Men With PSA ≥ 3ng/ml Using Biopsy as the Sole Ground Truth
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evolving role of biomarkers beyond prostate‑specific antigen in refining prostate cancer screening: From blood‑based tests to urinary and genetic markers (Review).Molecular medicine reports · 2026Review
- Article
- Utility of the PROSTest, a Novel Blood-Based Molecular Assay, Versus PSA for Prostate Cancer Stratification and Detection of Disease.The Prostate · 2026Article
- PROSTest, a Multigene Liquid Biopsy Signature, Effectively Stratifies Patients With High PSA for Prostate Biopsy.The Prostate · 2026Article
- Case Report: Primed dendritic cell immunotherapy for multiple solid tumors.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Article
- Utility of the prostest to predict and monitor response to chemotherapy in metastatic Castration-Resistant prostate cancer: A prospective pilot study.BMC cancer · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionProstate cancer (PCa) is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in men in the United States, following skin cancer, with an incidence rate of 112.7 per 100,000 men per year. The need for a reliable, non-invasive diagnostic tool for early PCa detection (screening, biochemical residual disease) remains unmet due to the limitations of PSA testing, which often leads to overdiagnosis and overtreatment. The PROSTest is a novel, blood-based qPCR assay that assesses gene expression to diagnose PCa and predict patient outcomes to different treatments. This study aimed to validate the sensitivity and specificity of the PROSTest in a diverse cohort of US-based PCa patients compared to healthy controls. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective study included 143 PCa patients and 92 healthy controls. Blood samples were collected, and the PROSTest was conducted following RNA isolation and cDNA production, using a predefined 27-gene algorithm to provide a binary output. The assay's sensitivity and specificity were evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, with a 50% score cut-off distinguishing PCa from non-PCa patients. Analytical reproducibility was assessed with intra- and inter-assay comparisons of Ct values and PROSTest scores.
resultsThe PROSTest demonstrated a sensitivity of 94% (95% CI 89-98%) and a specificity of 88% (95% CI 80-94%) in distinguishing PCa patients from controls, with an area under the ROC curve (AUROC) of 0.97. The false positive rate among controls was 12%. Intra- and inter-assay reproducibility was confirmed with no significant differences in Ct values or PROSTest scores between operators or assays. PROSTest scores were significantly higher in PCa patients compared to controls and in those undergoing treatment versus untreated patients.
conclusionThis validation study confirms the high sensitivity and specificity of the PROSTest in detecting PCa in a diverse USA cohort. The assay's robustness and reproducibility support its potential as a reliable diagnostic tool for PCa detection and monitoring. Further studies are warranted to evaluate its utility across broader populations and treatment settings.
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.