Assessing the clinical impact of prostate-specific antigen assay variability and nonequimolarity: a simulation study based on the population of the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is the most widely used serum biomarker to differentiate between malignant and benign prostate disease. Assays that measure PSA can be biased and/or nonequimolar and hence report significantly different PSA values for samples with the same nominal amount....

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Roddam, A, Price, C, Allen, N, Ward, A
Format: Journal article
Language:English
Published: 2004
_version_ 1826262431492472832
author Roddam, A
Price, C
Allen, N
Ward, A
author_facet Roddam, A
Price, C
Allen, N
Ward, A
author_sort Roddam, A
collection OXFORD
description BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is the most widely used serum biomarker to differentiate between malignant and benign prostate disease. Assays that measure PSA can be biased and/or nonequimolar and hence report significantly different PSA values for samples with the same nominal amount. This report investigates the effects of biased and nonequimolar assays on the decision to recommend a patient for a prostate biopsy based on age-specific PSA values. METHODS: A simulation model, calibrated to the distribution of PSA values in the United Kingdom, was developed to estimate the effects of bias, nonequimolarity, and analytical imprecision in terms of the rates of men who are recommended to have a biopsy on the basis of their assay-reported PSA values when their true PSA values are below the threshold (false positives) or vice versa (false negatives). RESULTS: False recommendation rates for a calibrated equimolar assay are 0.5-0.9% for analytical imprecision between 5% and 10%. Positive bias leads to significant increases in false positives and significant decreases in false negatives, whereas negative bias has the opposite effect. False-positive rates for nonequimolar assays increase from 0.5% to 13% in the worst-case scenario, whereas false-negative rates are almost always 0%. CONCLUSIONS: Biased and nonequimolar assays can have major detrimental effects on both false-negative and false-positive rates for recommending biopsy. PSA assays should therefore be calibrated to the International Standards and be unbiased and equimolar in response to minimize the likelihood of incorrect clinical decisions, which are potentially detrimental for both patient and healthcare provider.
first_indexed 2024-03-06T19:36:04Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:1f167db4-4fbf-4129-bab8-297f19329a44
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-06T19:36:04Z
publishDate 2004
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:1f167db4-4fbf-4129-bab8-297f19329a442022-03-26T11:19:56ZAssessing the clinical impact of prostate-specific antigen assay variability and nonequimolarity: a simulation study based on the population of the United Kingdom.Journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:1f167db4-4fbf-4129-bab8-297f19329a44EnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2004Roddam, APrice, CAllen, NWard, A BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is the most widely used serum biomarker to differentiate between malignant and benign prostate disease. Assays that measure PSA can be biased and/or nonequimolar and hence report significantly different PSA values for samples with the same nominal amount. This report investigates the effects of biased and nonequimolar assays on the decision to recommend a patient for a prostate biopsy based on age-specific PSA values. METHODS: A simulation model, calibrated to the distribution of PSA values in the United Kingdom, was developed to estimate the effects of bias, nonequimolarity, and analytical imprecision in terms of the rates of men who are recommended to have a biopsy on the basis of their assay-reported PSA values when their true PSA values are below the threshold (false positives) or vice versa (false negatives). RESULTS: False recommendation rates for a calibrated equimolar assay are 0.5-0.9% for analytical imprecision between 5% and 10%. Positive bias leads to significant increases in false positives and significant decreases in false negatives, whereas negative bias has the opposite effect. False-positive rates for nonequimolar assays increase from 0.5% to 13% in the worst-case scenario, whereas false-negative rates are almost always 0%. CONCLUSIONS: Biased and nonequimolar assays can have major detrimental effects on both false-negative and false-positive rates for recommending biopsy. PSA assays should therefore be calibrated to the International Standards and be unbiased and equimolar in response to minimize the likelihood of incorrect clinical decisions, which are potentially detrimental for both patient and healthcare provider.
spellingShingle Roddam, A
Price, C
Allen, N
Ward, A
Assessing the clinical impact of prostate-specific antigen assay variability and nonequimolarity: a simulation study based on the population of the United Kingdom.
title Assessing the clinical impact of prostate-specific antigen assay variability and nonequimolarity: a simulation study based on the population of the United Kingdom.
title_full Assessing the clinical impact of prostate-specific antigen assay variability and nonequimolarity: a simulation study based on the population of the United Kingdom.
title_fullStr Assessing the clinical impact of prostate-specific antigen assay variability and nonequimolarity: a simulation study based on the population of the United Kingdom.
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the clinical impact of prostate-specific antigen assay variability and nonequimolarity: a simulation study based on the population of the United Kingdom.
title_short Assessing the clinical impact of prostate-specific antigen assay variability and nonequimolarity: a simulation study based on the population of the United Kingdom.
title_sort assessing the clinical impact of prostate specific antigen assay variability and nonequimolarity a simulation study based on the population of the united kingdom
work_keys_str_mv AT roddama assessingtheclinicalimpactofprostatespecificantigenassayvariabilityandnonequimolarityasimulationstudybasedonthepopulationoftheunitedkingdom
AT pricec assessingtheclinicalimpactofprostatespecificantigenassayvariabilityandnonequimolarityasimulationstudybasedonthepopulationoftheunitedkingdom
AT allenn assessingtheclinicalimpactofprostatespecificantigenassayvariabilityandnonequimolarityasimulationstudybasedonthepopulationoftheunitedkingdom
AT warda assessingtheclinicalimpactofprostatespecificantigenassayvariabilityandnonequimolarityasimulationstudybasedonthepopulationoftheunitedkingdom