Interchangeability and Diagnostic Accuracy of Two Assays for Total and Free Prostate-Specific Antigen: Two not Always Related Items

Author:

Dittadi R.12,Franceschini R.32,Fortunato A.4,Zancan M.3,Barichello M.5,Tasca A.6,Giavarina D.4,Peloso L.3,Soffiati G.4,Gion M.7

Affiliation:

1. Laboratory Analysis Unit, General Regional Hospital, AULSS 12, Mestre-Venice

2. These authors contributed equally to this work.

3. ABO Association, c/o Center for the Study of Biological Markers of Malignancy, IOV IRCCS - AULSS 12, Venice

4. Clinical Pathology Department, S. Bortolo Hospital, Vicenza

5. Department of Urology, General Regional Hospital, Vicenza

6. Urology Unit, S. Bortolo Hospital, Vicenza

7. Center for the Study of Biological Markers of Malignancy, Consortium Istituto Oncologico Veneto, IRCCS - AULSS 12, Venice - Italy

Abstract

The variation between different PSA assays seems to influence the interpretation of individual PSA values and the clinical decisions about prostate cancer. One reason for this variability could be the different reactivity of antibodies for the various molecular forms of serum PSA; as a result, samples containing the same amount of tPSA but different proportions of fPSA can produce very different values. In this study, serum samples were collected prospectively from 152 consecutive patients referred to 2 institutions (Regional Hospital, Venice, 90 subjects; San Bortolo Hospital, Vicenza, 62 subjects) for PSA elevation and/or symptoms. Serum samples were assessed according to the manufacturers’ instructions on the following 2 analyzers: the Immulite 2000 assay (Diagnostic Products Corporation, Los Angeles, USA), which measures tPSA and fPSA, and the ADVIA Centaur (Bayer Diagnostics, Tarrytown, USA), which assays tPSA and cPSA. cPSA values were transformed into fPSA by the equation fPSA=tPSA-cPSA. When taking Immulite tPSA and f/tPSA values as 100%, ADVIA Centaur values were 92.6% and 122%, respectively, which means that 20% of patients would be classified differently according to the traditional biopsy cutoff. In conclusion, there are considerable differences between the 2 methods, which could affect clinical decisions.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Cancer Research,Clinical Biochemistry,Oncology,Pathology and Forensic Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3