4.6 Article

Novel non-invasive biomarkers that distinguish between benign prostate hyperplasia and prostate cancer

Journal

BMC CANCER
Volume 15, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-015-1284-z

Keywords

Non-invasive biomarkers; Benign prostate hyperplasia; Prostate cancer

Categories

Funding

  1. Ellison Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The objective of this study was to discover and to validate novel noninvasive biomarkers that distinguish between benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) and localized prostate cancer (PCa), thereby helping to solve the diagnostic dilemma confronting clinicians who treat these patients. Methods: Quantitative iTRAQ LC/LC/MS/MS analysis was used to identify proteins that are differentially expressed in the urine of men with BPH compared with those who have localized PCa. These proteins were validated in 173 urine samples from patients diagnosed with BPH (N = 83) and PCa (N = 90). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify the predictive biomarkers. Results: Three proteins, beta 2M, PGA3, and MUC3 were identified by iTRAQ and validated by immunoblot analyses. Univariate analysis demonstrated significant elevations in urinary beta 2M (P < 0.001), PGA3 (P = 0.006), and MUC3 (P = 0.018) levels found in the urine of PCa patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed AUC values ranging from 0.618 for MUC3 (P = 0.009), 0.625 for PGA3 (P < 0.008), and 0.668 for beta 2M (P < 0.001). The combination of all three demonstrated an AUC of 0.710 (95% CI: 0.631 - 0.788, P < 0.001); diagnostic accuracy improved even more when these data were combined with PSA categories (AUC = 0.812, (95% CI: 0.740 - 0.885, P < 0.001). Conclusions: Urinary beta 2M, PGA3, and MUC3, when analyzed alone or when multiplexed with clinically defined categories of PSA, may be clinically useful in noninvasively resolving the dilemma of effectively discriminating between BPH and localized PCa.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available