Comparison of three commercial PSA assays: Results of restandardization of the Ciba Corning method

作者: Michael K. Brawer , Daniel D. Bankson , Virginia M. Haver , Jason C. Petteway

DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0045(19970301)30:4<269::AID-PROS7>3.0.CO;2-G

关键词:

摘要: BACKGROUND Consistency in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) quantitation by different PSA test manufacturers would minimize potential clinical confusion. The Ciba Corning ACS™ PSA2 calibration has been adjusted for alignment with a proposed international standard and concordance the Hybritech Tandem R assay. Herein we evaluate effectiveness of this recalibrated comparing it IMx (Abbott Laboratories) (Hybritech) assays. METHODS Archival serum was used that had stored at −70°C from men who underwent ultrasound-guided prostate needle biopsy. Assays were run according to each manufacturer's specifications singlicate on single thaw. RESULTS The study included sera 191 patients; 44 patients carcinoma. There 151 (Tandem R) range 0–10.0 ng/ml, 28 whom cancer. correlation coefficients versus ACS, IMx, ACS 0.958, 0.955, 0.979 benign 0.960, 0.954, 0.985 those cancer, respectively. corresponding slopes 1.029, 0.855, 0.824 without 1.044, 0.830, 0.790, respectively, malignancy. CONCLUSIONS These data demonstrate substantial equivalence restandardized assay method. Significant bias exists between these methods lower results being identified latter. These findings have significant implication, particularly screening when an are compared other assays. Prostate 30:269–273, 1997. © 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.1

参考文章(22)
William J. Ellis, Michael P. Chetner, Steven D. Preston, Michael K. Brawer, Diagnosis of Prostatic Carcinoma: The Yield of Serum Prostate Specific Antigen, Digital Rectal Examination and Transrectal Ultrasonography Journal of Urology. ,vol. 152, pp. 1520- 1525 ,(1994) , 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)32460-6
William H. Cooner, B.R. Mosley, Charles L. Rutherford, Jeff H. Beard, Harry S. Pond, R. Bruce Bass, William J. Terry, Clinical application of transrectal ultrasonography and prostate specific antigen in the search for prostate cancer. The Journal of Urology. ,vol. 139, pp. 758- 761 ,(1988) , 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)42624-3
Michael K. Brawer, Michael P. Chetner, Jeanette Beatie, David M. Buchner, Robert L. Vessella, Paul H. Lange, Screening for Prostatic Carcinoma with Prostate Specific Antigen The Journal of Urology. ,vol. 147, pp. 841- 845 ,(1992) , 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)37401-3
M H Wener, P R Daum, M K Brawer, Variation in measurement of prostate-specific antigen: importance of method and lot variability. Clinical Chemistry. ,vol. 41, pp. 1730- 1737 ,(1995) , 10.1093/CLINCHEM/41.12.1730
A M Zhou, P C Tewari, B I Bluestein, G W Caldwell, F L Larsen, Multiple forms of prostate-specific antigen in serum: differences in immunorecognition by monoclonal and polyclonal assays. Clinical Chemistry. ,vol. 39, pp. 2483- 2491 ,(1993) , 10.1093/CLINCHEM/39.12.2483
William H. Cooner, B.R. Mosley, Charles L. Rutherford, Jeff H. Beard, Harry S. Pond, William J. Terry, Todd C. Igel, Donald D. Kidd, Prostate cancer detection in a clinical urological practice by ultrasonography, digital rectal examination and prostate specific antigen The Journal of Urology. ,vol. 143, pp. 1146- 1152 ,(1990) , 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)40211-4
Michel Bazinet, Alaa W. Meshref, Claude Trudel, Samuel Aronson, François Péloquin, Mahmoud Nachabe, Louis R. Bégin, Mostafa M. Elhilali, Prospective evaluation of prostate-specificantigen density and systematic biopsies for early detection of prosttic carcinoma Urology. ,vol. 43, pp. 44- 51 ,(1994) , 10.1016/S0090-4295(94)80260-2
Michael K. Brawer, Phyllis Daum, Jason C. Petteway, Mark H. Wener, Assay variability in serum prostate‐specific antigen determination The Prostate. ,vol. 27, pp. 1- 6 ,(1995) , 10.1002/PROS.2990270102
Daniel J. Culkin, Frank B. Gelder, John A. Mata, Dennis D. Venable, Roger I. Zitman, Cellular PSA in benign and malignant prostate The Prostate. ,vol. 26, pp. 1- 4 ,(1995) , 10.1002/PROS.2990260102
Joseph E. Oesterling, Mark A. Moyad, George L. Wright, Gary R. Beck, An analytical comparison of the three most commonly used prostate-specific antigen assays: Tandem-R, Tandem-E, and IMx. Urology. ,vol. 46, pp. 524- 532 ,(1995) , 10.1016/S0090-4295(99)80266-0