Oberpenning Frank, Weining Christoph, Brandt Burkhard, De Angelis Gabriela, Heinecke Achim, Hamm Michael, Stieber Petra, Hertle Lothar, Schmid Hans-Peter, Semjonow Axel
Department of Urology, University of Münster, Albert-Schweitzer Str. 33, D-48129 Münster, Germany.
Eur Urol. 2002 Dec;42(6):577-82; discussion 582. doi: 10.1016/s0302-2838(02)00449-9.
We investigated the impact of interchanging free prostate specific antigen (f-PSA) concentrations from 10 different assays over a reference total PSA (t-PSA) on predicting prostate histology with free-to-total PSA ratios (f/t-PSA).
Archival sera from 80 t-PSA- and age-matched pairs of histologically confirmed prostate cancer (PCA) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients with t-PSA levels between 2 and 25 microg/l were investigated. Serum aliquots were analyzed for t- and f-PSA using a reference method (Access, Beckmann-Coulter Hybritech) and 10 commercially available f-PSA assays. Passing Bablok and linear regression were performed to investigate the interassay agreement between f-PSA assays. To compare diagnostic performance, ROC curves for PCA detection were calculated for the 10 f/t-PSA combinations using the reference t-PSA as denominator. Sensitivities, specificities and f/t-PSA cut-offs were calculated for varying points of the ROC curve.
Despite good correlation of all 10 f-PSA assays with the reference method 4 showed significantly lower mean f-PSA levels. For f/t-PSA as a predictor of prostate histology, areas under the ROC curve (AUC) varied between 0.65 and 0.71 and, if compared to the reference method (AUC=0.70), were significantly lower in three cases. Ensuring 80% specificity, sensitivities ranged between 34% and 54% (reference method: 53%) and f/t-PSA cutpoints differed considerably depending on the f-PSA assay used (range: 0.15-0.24; reference: 0.15). Similar variations were noted at 95% specificity and 80% and 95% sensitivity.
Arbitrary combinations of f- and t-PSA assays should not be used to calculate f/t-PSA ratios unless adequate studies have validated the diagnostic performance and cut-offs of that particular assay choice.
我们研究了在参考总前列腺特异性抗原(t-PSA)的情况下,10种不同检测方法中游离前列腺特异性抗原(f-PSA)浓度的互换对用游离-总前列腺特异性抗原比值(f/t-PSA)预测前列腺组织学的影响。
对80对经组织学证实的前列腺癌(PCA)和良性前列腺增生(BPH)患者的存档血清进行研究,这些患者的t-PSA水平在2至25μg/l之间,且t-PSA和年龄匹配。使用参考方法(Access,贝克曼库尔特Hybritech)和10种市售的f-PSA检测方法对血清等分试样进行t-PSA和f-PSA分析。进行Passing Bablok和线性回归以研究f-PSA检测方法之间的检测间一致性。为了比较诊断性能,以参考t-PSA作为分母,计算10种f/t-PSA组合检测PCA的ROC曲线。计算ROC曲线不同点的敏感性、特异性和f/t-PSA临界值。
尽管所有10种f-PSA检测方法与参考方法的相关性良好,但有4种检测方法显示平均f-PSA水平显著较低。对于f/t-PSA作为前列腺组织学的预测指标,ROC曲线下面积(AUC)在0.65至0.71之间,与参考方法(AUC = 0.70)相比,有3种情况显著较低。确保特异性为80%时,敏感性在34%至54%之间(参考方法:53%),f/t-PSA切点根据所使用的f-PSA检测方法有很大差异(范围:0.15 - 0.24;参考值:0.15)。在特异性为95%以及敏感性为80%和95%时也观察到类似的差异。
除非有充分的研究验证了特定检测方法选择的诊断性能和临界值,否则不应随意组合f-PSA和t-PSA检测方法来计算f/t-PSA比值。