Suppr超能文献

4种检测总前列腺特异性抗原和游离前列腺特异性抗原方法的一致性及诊断准确性

Consistency and diagnostic accuracy of 4 assays in the detection of the total and free prostate-specific antigen.

作者信息

Deng Lingyan, Yue Daoyuan, Wang Xu, Li Huijun

机构信息

Department of Laboratory Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College of Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.

出版信息

Transl Androl Urol. 2023 Feb 28;12(2):261-270. doi: 10.21037/tau-23-29. Epub 2023 Feb 23.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The lack of interchangeability among prostate-specific antigen (PSA) assays causes difficulties in clinical interpretation. The currently available mainstream assays for PSA were based on Western populations, but it is not clear whether these assays yield different results in prostate cancer (PCa) screening in Chinese populations.

METHODS

A total of 163 men with a total PSA (tPSA) level of 2-10 µg/L scheduled for prostate biopsy were enrolled in this study. The levels of the tPSA and free PSA (fPSA) were detected by the Beckman (using the Hybritech calibration), Roche, Abbott, and Mindray (using the World Health Organization's calibration). Methodological comparison were performed according to EP9-A3 of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, USA. With pathological diagnosis as the gold standard, the predictive accuracy of the biomarkers was quantified as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for each of the four methods.

RESULTS

A total of 32 PCa patients and 131 patients with benign prostate disease were included in this study. The tPSA levels detected by the Roche, Abbott, and Mindray showed good consistency with Beckman but not of the fPSA levels. Compared to the Beckman tPSA values, the measured values were 1.1% higher for Roche, 2.1% higher for Abbott, and 6.7% higher for Mindray. The fPSA levels measured by Roche, Abbott, and Mindray were 5.4% lower, 22.1% higher, and 4.6% higher than Beckman, respectively. When the tPSA was 4 ng/mL, the diagnostic performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and missed diagnosis rate) was similar among these 4 assays. When the %fPSA was 16%, Abbott had the highest missed diagnosis rate (37.50%), while Mindray had a sensitivity of 81.25%, the highest negative predictive value (93.88%), and the lowest missed diagnosis rate (18.75%).

CONCLUSIONS

When the tPSA level is 2-10 ng/mL, the Mindray, like the Roche and Abbott, has good consistency with the Beckman in detecting tPSA, which makes it possible to relieve the pressure of clinical interpretation. However, 4 assays using the same %fPSA cut-off may lead to diverse missed diagnosis rates for PCa screening in China.

摘要

背景

前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)检测方法之间缺乏互换性,给临床解读带来困难。目前可用的PSA主流检测方法基于西方人群,但尚不清楚这些检测方法在中国人群的前列腺癌(PCa)筛查中是否会产生不同结果。

方法

本研究纳入了163名计划进行前列腺活检、总PSA(tPSA)水平为2 - 10μg/L的男性。tPSA和游离PSA(fPSA)水平通过贝克曼(使用Hybritech校准)、罗氏、雅培和迈瑞(使用世界卫生组织校准)进行检测。根据美国临床和实验室标准协会的EP9 - A3进行方法学比较。以病理诊断为金标准,将这四种方法中每种生物标志物的预测准确性量化为受试者操作特征曲线(AUC)下的面积。

结果

本研究共纳入32例PCa患者和131例良性前列腺疾病患者。罗氏、雅培和迈瑞检测的tPSA水平与贝克曼检测结果具有良好的一致性,但fPSA水平不一致。与贝克曼tPSA值相比,罗氏测量值高1.1%,雅培高2.1%,迈瑞高6.7%。罗氏、雅培和迈瑞测量的fPSA水平分别比贝克曼低5.4%、高22.1%和高4.6%。当tPSA为4 ng/mL时,这4种检测方法的诊断性能(敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值和漏诊率)相似。当%fPSA为16%时,雅培的漏诊率最高(37.50%),而迈瑞的敏感性为81.25%,阴性预测值最高(93.88%),漏诊率最低(18.75%)。

结论

当tPSA水平为2 - 10 ng/mL时,迈瑞与罗氏和雅培一样,在检测tPSA方面与贝克曼具有良好的一致性,这使得缓解临床解读压力成为可能。然而,使用相同的%fPSA临界值的4种检测方法在中国PCa筛查中可能导致不同的漏诊率。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8a8f/10006006/6078013ff529/tau-12-02-261-f1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验