Romero Otero Javier, Garcia Gomez Borja, Campos Juanatey Felix, Touijer Karim A
Hospital Universitario 12 Octubre, Madrid, Spain.
Hospital Universitario 12 Octubre, Madrid, Spain; Hospital Universitario Marques De Valdecilla, Santander, Spain.
Urol Oncol. 2014 Apr;32(3):252-60. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2013.09.017. Epub 2014 Feb 1.
Many aspects of prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment could be greatly advanced with new, effective biomarkers. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has multiple weaknesses as a biomarker, such as not distinguishing well between cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia or between indolent and aggressive cancers, thus leading to overtreatment, especially unnecessary biopsies. PSA also often fails to indicate accurately which patients are responding to a given treatment. Yet PSA is the only prostate cancer biomarker routinely used by urologists. Here, we provide updated information on the most relevant of the other biomarkers currently in use or in development for prostate cancer. Recent research shows improvement over using PSA alone by comparing total PSA (tPSA) or free PSA (fPSA) with new, related markers, such as prostate cancer antigen (PCA) 3, the individual molecular forms of PSA (proPSA, benign PSA, and intact PSA), and kallikreins other than PSA. Promising results have also been seen with the use of the fusion gene TMPRSS2:ERG and with various forms of the urokinase plasminogen activation receptor. Initially, there were high hopes for early PCA, but those data were not reproducible and thus research on early PCA has been abandoned. Much work remains to be done before any of these biomarkers are fully validated and accepted. Currently, the only markers discussed in this paper with Food and Drug Administration-approved tests are PCA 3 and an isoform of proPSA, [-2]proPSA. Assays are in development for most of the other biomarkers described in this paper. While the biomarker validation process can be long and filled with obstacles, the rewards will be great-in terms of both patient care and costs to the health care system.
新型有效的生物标志物可极大地推动前列腺癌诊断与治疗的诸多方面。前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)作为一种生物标志物存在多种缺陷,比如在区分癌症与良性前列腺增生、惰性癌与侵袭性癌方面表现不佳,进而导致过度治疗,尤其是不必要的活检。PSA也常常无法准确指示哪些患者对特定治疗有反应。然而,PSA却是泌尿科医生常规使用的唯一前列腺癌生物标志物。在此,我们提供了有关目前正在使用或处于研发阶段的其他最相关前列腺癌生物标志物的最新信息。最近的研究表明,通过将总PSA(tPSA)或游离PSA(fPSA)与新的相关标志物进行比较,如前列腺癌抗原(PCA)3、PSA的个体分子形式(proPSA、良性PSA和完整PSA)以及除PSA之外的激肽释放酶,相比单独使用PSA有了改进。使用融合基因TMPRSS2:ERG以及各种形式的尿激酶型纤溶酶原激活受体也取得了有前景的结果。最初,人们对早期PCA寄予厚望,但这些数据无法重复,因此对早期PCA的研究已被放弃。在这些生物标志物中的任何一种得到充分验证和接受之前,仍有许多工作要做。目前,本文讨论的唯一经过美国食品药品监督管理局批准测试的标志物是PCA 3和proPSA的一种同工型,[-2]proPSA。本文描述的大多数其他生物标志物的检测方法正在研发中。虽然生物标志物的验证过程可能漫长且充满障碍,但从患者护理和医疗系统成本两方面来看,回报将是巨大的。