Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2010 Sep 1;16(17):4374-81.
doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1328. Epub 2010 Aug 24.

The relationship between prostate-specific antigen and prostate cancer risk: the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group

Andrew J Vickers  1 , Angel M Cronin, Monique J Roobol, Jonas Hugosson, J Stephen Jones, Michael W Kattan, Eric Klein, Freddie Hamdy, David Neal, Jenny Donovan, Dipen J Parekh, Donna Ankerst, George Bartsch, Helmut Klocker, Wolfgang Horninger, Amine Benchikh, Gilles Salama, Arnauld Villers, Steve J Freedland, Daniel M Moreira, Fritz H Schröder, Hans Lilja
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

The relationship between prostate-specific antigen and prostate cancer risk: the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group

Andrew J Vickers et al. Clin Cancer Res. .

Erratum in

  • Clin Cancer Res. 2011 Jun 1;17(11):3852

Abstract

Purpose: The relationship between prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and prostate cancer risk remains subject to fundamental disagreements. We hypothesized that the risk of prostate cancer on biopsy for a given PSA level is affected by identifiable characteristics of the cohort under study.

Experimental design: We used data from five European and three U.S. cohorts of men undergoing biopsy for prostate cancer; six were population-based studies and two were clinical cohorts. The association between PSA and prostate cancer was calculated separately for each cohort using locally weighted scatterplot smoothing.

Results: The final data set included 25,772 biopsies and 8,503 cancers. There were gross disparities between cohorts with respect to both the prostate cancer risk at a given PSA level and the shape of the risk curve. These disparities were associated with identifiable differences between cohorts: for a given PSA level, a greater number of biopsy cores increased the risk of cancer (odds ratio for >6- versus 6-core biopsy, 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-1.54; P < 0.0005); recent screening led to a smaller increase in risk per unit change in PSA (P = 0.001 for interaction term) and U.S. cohorts had higher risk than the European cohorts (2.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.99-2.30; P < 0.0005).

Conclusions: Our results suggest that the relationship between PSA and risk of a positive prostate biopsy varies, both in terms of the probability of prostate cancer at a given PSA value and the shape of the risk curve. This poses challenges to the use of PSA-driven algorithms to determine whether biopsy is indicated.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Predicted probability of prostate cancer with increasing PSA, separately by cohort. Legend:

  1. Cleveland Clinic

  2. Durham VA

  3. SABOR

  4. PCPT

  5. Tyrol

  6. Göteborg rounds 2 to 6

  7. ProtecT

  8. Rotterdam rounds 2 to 3

  9. Rotterdam round 1

  10. Göteborg round 1

  11. Tarn

Panel A: Prediction of prostate cancer Panel B: Prediction of prostate cancer for men with negative DRE, non-African origin, and no prior biopsy. Note that ProtecT and Durham are excluded because DRE result was not available for the majority of men biopsied in those cohorts. The SABOR cohort includes only a very small number of men with PSA > 7 (n=16), and sampling variation likely explains the apparent reduction in risk above PSA of 7. Panel C: Prediction of high grade prostate cancer for men with negative DRE, non-African origin, and no prior biopsy. Note that ProtecT and Durham are excluded because DRE result was not available for the majority of men biopsied in those cohorts; Göteborg round 1, Tarn and SABOR are excluded due to low numbers of high grade cancers. The risk from the PCPT risk calculator was determined for a man age 65 at biopsy, which was close to the mean age of the entire cohort.
Figure 1
Figure 1
Predicted probability of prostate cancer with increasing PSA, separately by cohort. Legend:

  1. Cleveland Clinic

  2. Durham VA

  3. SABOR

  4. PCPT

  5. Tyrol

  6. Göteborg rounds 2 to 6

  7. ProtecT

  8. Rotterdam rounds 2 to 3

  9. Rotterdam round 1

  10. Göteborg round 1

  11. Tarn

Panel A: Prediction of prostate cancer Panel B: Prediction of prostate cancer for men with negative DRE, non-African origin, and no prior biopsy. Note that ProtecT and Durham are excluded because DRE result was not available for the majority of men biopsied in those cohorts. The SABOR cohort includes only a very small number of men with PSA > 7 (n=16), and sampling variation likely explains the apparent reduction in risk above PSA of 7. Panel C: Prediction of high grade prostate cancer for men with negative DRE, non-African origin, and no prior biopsy. Note that ProtecT and Durham are excluded because DRE result was not available for the majority of men biopsied in those cohorts; Göteborg round 1, Tarn and SABOR are excluded due to low numbers of high grade cancers. The risk from the PCPT risk calculator was determined for a man age 65 at biopsy, which was close to the mean age of the entire cohort.
Figure 1
Figure 1
Predicted probability of prostate cancer with increasing PSA, separately by cohort. Legend:

  1. Cleveland Clinic

  2. Durham VA

  3. SABOR

  4. PCPT

  5. Tyrol

  6. Göteborg rounds 2 to 6

  7. ProtecT

  8. Rotterdam rounds 2 to 3

  9. Rotterdam round 1

  10. Göteborg round 1

  11. Tarn

Panel A: Prediction of prostate cancer Panel B: Prediction of prostate cancer for men with negative DRE, non-African origin, and no prior biopsy. Note that ProtecT and Durham are excluded because DRE result was not available for the majority of men biopsied in those cohorts. The SABOR cohort includes only a very small number of men with PSA > 7 (n=16), and sampling variation likely explains the apparent reduction in risk above PSA of 7. Panel C: Prediction of high grade prostate cancer for men with negative DRE, non-African origin, and no prior biopsy. Note that ProtecT and Durham are excluded because DRE result was not available for the majority of men biopsied in those cohorts; Göteborg round 1, Tarn and SABOR are excluded due to low numbers of high grade cancers. The risk from the PCPT risk calculator was determined for a man age 65 at biopsy, which was close to the mean age of the entire cohort.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Effects of biopsy scheme. ProtecT (10 cores) vs ERSPC Göteborg and Rotterdam (6 cores)
Figure 3
Figure 3
Effects of previous PSA screening. Göteborg and Rotterdam round 1 (both with no previous screening) vs Göteborg rounds 2–6 and Rotterdam rounds 2–3 (all had previous screening)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Stamey TA, Caldwell M, McNeal JE, et al. The prostate specific antigen era in the United States is over for prostate cancer: what happened in the last 20 years? J Urol. 2004;172:1297–1301. - PubMed
    1. Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Chi C, et al. Operating characteristics of prostate-specific antigen in men with an initial PSA level of 3.0 ng/ml or lower. Jama. 2005;294:66–70. - PubMed
    1. Schroder FH, Bangma CH, Roobol MJ. Is it necessary to detect all prostate cancers in men with serum PSA levels <3.0 ng/ml? A comparison of biopsy results of PCPT and outcome-related information from ERSPC. Eur Urol. 2008;53:901–908. - PubMed
    1. Schroder F, Kattan MW. The comparability of models for predicting the risk of a positive prostate biopsy with prostate-specific antigen alone: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2008;54:274–290. - PubMed
    1. Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1320–1328. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances