Methylated DNA markers in urine aid in the selective identification of patients with prostate cancer as well as clinically significant pathology.

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

5091 Background: Controversy surrounding prostate-specific antigen (PSA) based screening for prostate cancer (PCa) highlights the need for non-invasive assays that better discriminate patients with and without clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Such distinction avoids overtreatment in patients with absent or indolent disease while capturing pathology that would derive benefit from intervention. We analyzed the presence of specific methylated DNA markers (MDMs) within urine samples of patients with biopsy proven PCa and assessed the ability to discriminate these patients from healthy controls with no clinical suspicion for PCa. Methods: 24 healthy volunteers with no clinical suspicion for PCa were age-matched to 24 patients with biopsy-confirmed disease across all Gleason scores. Urine collected from subjects was centrifuged with the cell-free supernatant analyzed in a blinded fashion for methylation signal within specific DNA sequences across 14 genes ( HES5, ZNF655, ITPRIPL1, MAX.chr3.193, SLCO3A1, CHST11, SERPINB9, WNT3A, KCNB2, GAS6, AKR1B1, MAX.chr3.727, GRASP, ST6GALNAC2) by target enrichment long-probe quantitative-amplified signal assays. A patient was considered to have a positive MDM panel if any individual marker exceeded the corresponding100% specificity cut-off value (overall MDM panel specificity of 100%). MDM panel positivity was used to evaluate the sensitivity for distinguishing patients with PCa (any Gleason score) from controls as well as discriminate csPCa cancers from PCa Gleason 6. Results: Median age of healthy controls and PCa patients was 70 years (IQR 67-72) and 65 years (IQR 61-71), respectively. Median PSA was 6.4 (IQR 4.9-9.0) among PCa patients, including median PSA of 5 (IQR 4.0-6.1) for Gleason 6, and 7.8 (IQR 5.1-9.2) for Gleason ≥7 disease. Gleason 6, Gleason 7, and Gleason 8+ cancer was noted in 8, 10, and 6 patients, respectively. Utilizing an overall specificity cut-off of 100% for discriminating normal controls from PCa cases across the MDM panel revealed an overall sensitivity of 83% (95% CI: 63-95%) for detection of PCa (6 of 8 Gleason 6, 9 of 10 Gleason 7, 5 of 6 Gleason 8+) and 88% (95% CI: 62-98%) for csPCa (Gleason ≥ 7). When considering a 100% specificity threshold for controls and Gleason 6 patients, the sensitivity the MDM panel was 69% (95% CI: 41-89%) for csPCa (6 of 10 Gleason 7, 5 of 6 Gleason 8+). Conclusions: We describe a panel of 14 MDMs within urine that offer high specificity and sensitivity for detection of prostate cancers as well as selective identification of clinically significant disease states. Prospective comparison between urine MDMs and PSA blood testing is necessary to discern the differential clinical impact of each screening methodology.