Purpose PSA and free PSA (fPSA) have limited specificity for detecting clinically significant, curable prostate cancer (PCa), leading to unnecessary biopsies and detection and treatment of some indolent tumors. [−2]proPSA (p2PSA) may improve specificity for detecting clinically significant PCa. Our objective was to evaluate p2PSA, fPSA, and PSA in a mathematical formula (prostate health index [phi] = [−2]proPSA / fPSA) × PSA1/2) to enhance specificity for detecting overall and high-grade PCa. Materials and Methods We enrolled 892 men in a prospective multi-institutional trial with no history of PCa, normal rectal examination, a PSA of 2–10 ng/mL, and ≥6- core prostate biopsy. We examined the relationship of serum PSA, %fPSA and phi with biopsy results. The primary endpoints were the specificity and AUC using phi to detect overall and Gleason ≥7 prostate cancer on biopsy compared with %fPSA. Results For the 2–10 ng/mL PSA range, at 80–95% sensitivity, the specificity and AUC (0.703) of phi exceeded those of PSA and %fPSA. Increasing phi was associated with a 4.7-fold increased risk of PCa and 1.61-fold increased risk of Gleason ≥7 disease on biopsy. The AUC for phi (0.724) exceeded that of %fPSA (0.670) in discriminating between PCa with Gleason ≥ 4+3 vs. lower grade disease or negative biopsies. Phi results were not associated with age and prostate volume. Conclusions Phi may be useful in PCa screening to reduce unnecessary biopsies in men age ≥50 years with PSA 2–10 ng/mL and negative DRE, with minimal loss in sensitivity.

Purpose The Prostate Health Index (phi) is a new test combining total, free and [-2]proPSA into a single score. It was recently approved by the FDA and is now commercially available in the U.S., Europe and Australia. We investigate whether phi improves specificity for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer and can help reduce prostate cancer over diagnosis. Materials and Methods From a multicenter prospective trial we identified 658 men age 50 years or older with prostate specific antigen 4 to 10 ng/ml and normal digital rectal examination who underwent prostate biopsy. In this population we compared the performance of prostate specific antigen, % free prostate specific antigen, [-2]proPSA and phi to predict biopsy results and, specifically, the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer using multiple criteria. Results The Prostate Health Index was significantly higher in men with Gleason 7 or greater and “Epstein significant” cancer. On receiver operating characteristic analysis phi had the highest AUC for overall cancer (AUCs phi 0.708, percent free prostate specific antigen 0.648, [-2]proPSA 0.550 and prostate specific antigen 0.516), Gleason 7 or greater (AUCs phi 0.707, percent free prostate specific antigen 0.661, [-2]proPSA 0.558, prostate specific antigen 0.551) and significant cancer (AUCs phi 0.698, percent free prostate specific antigen 0.654, [-2]proPSA 0.550, prostate specific antigen 0.549). At the 90% sensitivity cut point for phi (a score less than 28.6) 30.1% of patients could have been spared an unnecessary biopsy for benign disease or insignificant prostate cancer compared to 21.7% using percent free prostate specific antigen. Conclusions The new phi test outperforms its individual components of total, free and [-2]proPSA for the identification of clinically significant prostate cancer. Phi may be useful as part of a multivariable approach to reduce prostate biopsies and over diagnosis.

Background: The free prostate-specific antigen (PSA) isoform, [−2]proPSA, has been shown to be associated with prostate cancer. The study objective was to characterize the clinical utility of serum [−2]proPSA for prostate cancer detection and assess its association with aggressive disease.Methods: From among 669 subjects in a prospective prostate cancer detection study at four National Cancer Institute Early Detection Research Network clinical validation centers, 566 were eligible. Serum PSA, free PSA, and [−2]proPSA were measured (Beckman Coulter Access 2 Analyzer).Results: Two hundred and forty-five (43%) of the 566 participants had prostate cancer on biopsy. At 70% specificity, the sensitivity of %[−2]proPSA ([−2]proPSA/fPSA) was 54% [95% confidence interval (CI), 48-61%; null hypothesis, 40%]. Including %[−2]proPSA in a multivariate prediction model incorporating PSA and %fPSA improved the performance (P < 0.01). In the 2 to 4 ng/mL PSA range, %[−2]proPSA outperformed %fPSA (receiver operator characteristic-areas under the curve, 0.73 versus 0.61; P = 0.01). At 80% sensitivity, %[−2]proPSA had significantly higher specificity (51.6%; 95% CI, 41.2-61.8%) than PSA (29.9%; 95% CI, 21.0-40.0%) and %fPSA (28.9%; 95% CI, 20.1-39.0%). In the 2 to 10 ng/mL PSA range, a multivariate model had significant improvement (area under the curve, 0.76) over individual PSA forms (P < 0.01 to <0.0001). At 80% sensitivity, the specificity of %[−2]proPSA (44.9%; 95% CI, 38.4-51.5%) was significantly higher than PSA (30.8%; 95% CI, 24.9-37.1%) and relatively higher than %fPSA (34.6%; 95% CI, 28.5-41.4%). %[−2]proPSA increased with increasing Gleason score (P < 0.001) and was higher in aggressive cancers (P = 0.03).Conclusions: In this prospective study, %[−2]proPSA showed potential clinical utility for improving prostate cancer detection and was related to the risk of aggressive disease.Impact: The addition of %[−2]proPSA could affect the early detection of prostate cancer. Cancer Epidemiol