» Articles » PMID: 34869007

Prostate Health Index Density Outperforms Prostate Health Index in Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection

Overview
Journal Front Oncol
Specialty Oncology
Date 2021 Dec 6
PMID 34869007
Citations 8
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is considered neither sensitive nor specific for prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to compare total PSA (tPSA), percentage of free PSA (%fPSA), the PSA density (PSAD), Prostate Health Index (PHI), and the PHI density (PHID) to see which one could best predict clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa): a potentially lethal disease.

Methods: A total of 412 men with PSA of 2-20 ng/mL were prospectively included. Serum biomarkers for PCa was collected before transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. PHI was calculated by the formula: (p2PSA/fPSA) x √tPSA. PHID was calculated as PHI divided by prostate volume measured by transrectal ultrasound.

Results: Of the 412 men, 134 (32.5%) and 94(22.8%) were diagnosed with PCa and csPCa, respectively. We used the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and decision curve analyses (DCA) to compare the performance of PSA related parameters, PHI and PHID in diagnosing csPCa. AUC for tPSA, %fPSA, %p2PSA, PSAD, PHI and PHID were 0.56、0.63、0.76、0.74、0.77 and 0.82 respectively for csPCa detection. In the univariate analysis, the prostate volume, tPSA, %fPSA, %p2PSA, PHI, PSAD, and PHID were all significantly associated with csPCa, and PHID was the most important predictor (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.15-1.72). Besides, The AUC of PHID was significantly larger than PHI in csPCa diagnosis (=0.004). At 90% sensitivity, PHID had the highest specificity (54.1%) for csPCa and could reduce the most unnecessary biopsies (43.7%) and miss the fewest csPCa (8.5%) when PHID ≥ 0.67. In addition to AUC, DCA re-confirmed the clinical benefit of PHID over all PSA-related parameters and PHI in csPCa diagnosis. The PHID cut-off value was positively correlated with the csPCa ratio in the PHID risk table, which is useful for evaluating csPCa risk in a clinical setting.

Conclusion: The PHID is an excellent predictor of csPCa. The PHID risk table may be used in standard clinical practice to pre-select men at the highest risk of harboring csPCa.

Citing Articles

An online clustering algorithm predicting model for prostate cancer based on PHI-related variables and PI-RADS in different PSA populations.

Hu J, Miao Q, Ren J, Su H, Zhang X, Bi J Cancer Cell Int. 2025; 25(1):44.

PMID: 39948672 PMC: 11827463. DOI: 10.1186/s12935-025-03677-2.


Liquid Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Current Status and Emerging Prospects.

Liu Y, Hatano K, Nonomura N World J Mens Health. 2024; 43(1):8-27.

PMID: 38772530 PMC: 11704174. DOI: 10.5534/wjmh.230386.


Comparison of Prostate-Specific Antigen and Its Density and Prostate Health Index and Its Density for Detection of Prostate Cancer.

Boo Y, Chung J, Kang M, Sung H, Jeon H, Jeong B Biomedicines. 2023; 11(7).

PMID: 37509551 PMC: 10377372. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines11071912.


A prospective study of the prostate health index density and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer.

Chen Y, Xu D, Ruan M, Li H, Lin G, Song G Investig Clin Urol. 2023; 64(4):363-372.

PMID: 37417561 PMC: 10330413. DOI: 10.4111/icu.20230060.


Nomogram Using Prostate Health Index for Predicting Prostate Cancer in the Gray Zone: Prospective, Multicenter Study.

Chung J, Kim J, Lee S, Park H, Song G, Song W World J Mens Health. 2023; 42(1):168-177.

PMID: 37118959 PMC: 10782127. DOI: 10.5534/wjmh.220223.


References
1.
Vickers A, Elkin E . Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Making. 2006; 26(6):565-74. PMC: 2577036. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X06295361. View

2.
Busetto G, Del Giudice F, Maggi M, De Marco F, Porreca A, Sperduti I . Prospective assessment of two-gene urinary test with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate for men undergoing primary prostate biopsy. World J Urol. 2020; 39(6):1869-1877. PMC: 8217060. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-020-03359-w. View

3.
Filella X, Foj L, Alcover J, Auge J, Molina R, Jimenez W . The influence of prostate volume in prostate health index performance in patients with total PSA lower than 10 μg/L. Clin Chim Acta. 2014; 436:303-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.cca.2014.06.019. View

4.
Chiu P, Ng C, Semjonow A, Zhu Y, Vincendeau S, Houlgatte A . A Multicentre Evaluation of the Role of the Prostate Health Index (PHI) in Regions with Differing Prevalence of Prostate Cancer: Adjustment of PHI Reference Ranges is Needed for European and Asian Settings. Eur Urol. 2018; 75(4):558-561. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.10.047. View

5.
Vendrami C, McCarthy R, Chatterjee A, Casalino D, Schaeffer E, Catalona W . The Utility of Prostate Specific Antigen Density, Prostate Health Index, and Prostate Health Index Density in Predicting Positive Prostate Biopsy Outcome is Dependent on the Prostate Biopsy Methods. Urology. 2019; 129:153-159. PMC: 6592745. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2019.03.018. View