自建评分法评估前列腺特异性抗原值在灰区者的前列腺癌风险

doi:10.16150/j.1671-2870.2020.03.020

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的： 自建评分法评估前列腺特异性抗原（prostate specific antigen,PSA）值处在灰区（PSA值灰区）的前列腺疾病患者为前列腺癌的风险度,并验证其诊断价值。方法： 2017年4月至2019年11月期间,回顾性分析在我院行超声引导下经会阴前列腺穿刺活检的412例PSA值处于灰区（4~10 μg/L）前列腺疾病患者的资料,应用U检验及卡方检验比较良、恶性前列腺疾病组间的年龄、前列腺体积、血清学指标、PSA密度（prostate specific antigen density, PSAD）及直肠腔内超声（transrectal ultrasonography, TRUS）影像学表现差异,绘制受试者操作特征（receiver operating characteristic,ROC）曲线,确定有效参数曲线下面积最大时的临界值,建立PSA值灰区前列腺疾病患者恶性风险度评分,以前列腺穿刺活检为标准,绘制ROC曲线评估其诊断效能。结果： 良、恶性前列腺疾病组间,年龄、前列腺体积、游离/总前列腺特异性抗原比值（free/total prostate specific antigen ratio,f/t PSA）、PSAD及TRUS检出可疑结节方面差异均有统计学意义（P均<0.05）。应用年龄、前列腺体积、f/t PSA、PSAD及TRUS影像表现建立PSA值灰区前列腺疾病患者恶性风险度评分,总分0~5分患者的前列腺癌风险分别为3.12%、9.57%、18.02%、30.48%、53.45%及100%,采用该评分法（>2.5分）在PSA值灰区患者中诊断前列腺癌的ROC曲线下面积为0.759,灵敏度为71.41%,特异度为67.39%,优于其他单项指标。结论： 本研究新建立的前列腺疾病恶性风险度评分能有效评估PSA值处于灰区患者的前列腺癌风险。

关键词: 前列腺癌, 前列腺特异性抗原, 灰区, 活检, 恶性风险度评分

Abstract:

Objective: To establish a scoring method for assessing the risk of prostate cancer in subjects with prostate specific antigen（PSA） in gray zone, and evaluate its diagnostic value. Methods: A total of 412 cases with gray zone PSA (4~10 μg/L) were enrolled from April 2017 to November 2019, and all had transperineal prostate biopsy performed under ultrasound guidance. Patients were divided into benign and malignant groups based on biopsy. Differences in age, prostate volume, serological indicators, PSA density (PSAD) and transrectal ultrasonography （TRUS） imaging between benign and malignant groups were compared with U test and Chi-square test. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve was used to screen for the valid parameters and determine the cutoff values. The risk scoring method using valid parameters was then established for differentiating benign from malignant lesions in patients with gray zone PSA. The capability of the risk scoring method was assessed by ROC curve. Results: The age, prostate volume, free/total PSA ratio（f/t PSA） and PSAD between benign and malignant groups were statistically different (P<0.05). The detection rates of suspicious -looking nodules by TRUS between benign and malignant groups were also statistically different (P<0.05). The above mentioned indice including age, prostate volume, f/t PSA, PSAD and TRUS imaging findings were accepted to establish the risk scoring method. As scores of the scoring method increased from 0 to 5, the malignancy rates of prostate lesions assessed were 3.12%, 9.57%, 18.02%, 30.48%, 53.45% and 100%, respectively. The area under the ROC curve of the risk scoring method(cut off value >2.5) for diagnosing prostate cancer was 0.759, and the sensitivity and specificity were 71.41%, 67.39%, respectively. The performance of the established risk scoring method was superior to any other single index. Conclusions: The self-established scoring method could be used to assess malignant risk of prostate cancer in patients with gray zone PSA, which might facilitate the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Key words: Prostate, Prostate specific antigen, Gray zone, Biopsy, Scoring of malignant risk

中图分类号:

R737.25

于一飞, 王之倩, 李敏, 柳俊, 詹维伟. 自建评分法评估前列腺特异性抗原值在灰区者的前列腺癌风险[J]. 诊断学理论与实践, 2020, 19(03): 314-318.

YU Yifei, WANG Zhiqian, LI Min, LIU Jun, ZHAN Weiwei. A self-established scoring method for risk stratification of prostate cancer in subjects with gray zone PSA[J]. Journal of Diagnostics Concepts & Practice, 2020, 19(03): 314-318.

图/表 4

表1

表2

表3

图1

参考文献 18

[1]	Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2017[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2017, 67(1):7-30. doi: 10.3322/caac.21387 URL
[2]	韩苏军, 张思维, 陈万青, 等. 中国前列腺癌发病现状和流行趋势分析[J]. 临床肿瘤杂志, 2013, 18(4):330-334.
[3]	吴健民. PSA检测前列腺癌临床应用的建议[J]. 诊断学理论与实践, 2005, 4(3):181-184.
[4]	那彦群, 叶章群, 孙颖浩, 等. 中国泌尿外科疾病诊断治疗指南手册(2014版)[M]//前列腺癌诊断与治疗指南. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2014:61-81.
[5]	Smith DS, Humphrey PA, Catalona WJ. The early detection of prostate carcinoma with prostate specific antigen: The Washington University experience[J]. Cancer, 1997, 80(9):1852-1856. pmid: 9351559
[6]	Lee SJ. Infection after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy[J]. Korean J Urol, 2015, 56(5):346-350. doi: 10.4111/kju.2015.56.5.346 URL
[7]	Huang GL, Kang CH, Lee WC, et al. Comparisons of cancer detection rate and complications between transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy approaches - a single center preliminary study[J]. BMC Urol, 2019, 19(1):101. doi: 10.1186/s12894-019-0539-4 URL
[8]	Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2018, 68(6):394-424. doi: 10.3322/caac.21492 URL
[9]	Thompson IM, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, et al. The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2003, 349(3):215-224. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa030660 URL
[10]	Filella X, Albaladejo MD, Allué JA, et al. Prostate cancer screening: Guidelines review and laboratory issues[J]. Clin Chem Lab Med, 2019, 57(10):1474-1487. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2018-1252 pmid: 31120856
[11]	Catalona WJ, Richie JP, Ahmann FR, et al. Comparison of digital rectal examination and serum prostate specific antigen in the early detection of prostate cancer: Results of a multicenter clinical trial of 6,630 men[J]. J Urol, 2017, 197(2S):S200-S207.
[12]	Jiang CY, Shen PF, Wang C, et al. Comparison of diagnostic efficacy between transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy: A propensity score-matched study[J]. Asian J Androl, 2019, 21(6):612-617. doi: 10.4103/aja.aja_16_19 URL
[13]	陈彪, 陈立军, 麦海星, 等. 经会阴前列腺饱和分层穿刺在前列腺特异性抗原灰区患者中诊断前列腺癌的临床研究[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2013, 7(6):2404-2406.
[14]	Ouzaid I, Yates DR, Hupertan V, et al. A direct compa-rison of the diagnostic accuracy of three prostate cancer nomograms designed to predict the likelihood of a positive initial transrectal biopsy[J]. Prostate, 2012, 72(11):1200-1206. doi: 10.1002/pros.22470 pmid: 22213470
[15]	Liu J, Wang ZQ, Li M, et al. Establishment of two new predictive models for prostate cancer to determine whether to require prostate biopsy when the PSA level is in the diagnostic gray zone(4-10) ng ml(-1)[J]. Asian J Androl, 2020, 22(2):213-216. doi: 10.4103/aja.aja_46_19 URL
[16]	Wang L, Wang XF, Zhao WF, et al. Surface-projection-based transperineal cognitive fusion targeted biopsy of the prostate: an original technique with a good cancer detection rate[J]. BMC Urol, 2019, 19(1):107. doi: 10.1186/s12894-019-0535-8 pmid: 31684917
[17]	Gorin MA, Meyer AR, Zimmerman M, et al. Transpe-rineal prostate biopsy with cognitive magnetic resonance imaging/biplanar ultrasound fusion: description of technique and early results[J/OL]. World J Urol, 2019-11-02[2020-02-13]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31679065/.
[18]	Sönmez G, Tombul T, Demirta T, et al. A comparative study: Has MRI-guided fusion prostate biopsy changed the prostate-specific antigen gray-zone range?[J]. Cureus, 2019, 11(12):e6329.

指标	良性（n=307）	恶性（n=105）	P值
年龄(岁)	65.59±8.02	68.65±7.20	0.01
前列腺体积（mL）	48.48±18.17	36.93±16.45	<0.01
PSA（μg/L）	7.05	7.50	0.52
fPSA（μg/L）	1.27	1.16	0.32
PSAD（ng/mL²）	0.15	0.23	<0.01
f/t PSA	0.19	0.15	<0.01

表现	良性（n）	恶性（n）	合计（n）	P值	χ²值
TRUS阴性	195	55	250
TRUS阳性	112	50	162	0.04	4.07
合计	307	105	412