Applications of Urinary Extracellular Vesicles in the Diagnosis and Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous cancer among men in the UK, causing significant health and economic burdens. Diagnosis and risk prognostication can be challenging due to the genetic and clinical heterogeneity of prostate cancer as well as uncertainties in our knowledge of the underlying biology and natural history of disease development. Urinary extracellular vesicles (EVs) are microscopic, lipid bilayer defined particles released by cells that carry a variety of molecular cargoes including nucleic acids, proteins and other molecules. Urine is a plentiful source of prostate-derived EVs. In this narrative review, we summarise the evidence on the function of urinary EVs and their applications in the evolving field of prostate cancer diagnostics and active surveillance. EVs are implicated in the development of all hallmarks of prostate cancer, and this knowledge has been applied to the development of multiple diagnostic tests, which are largely based on RNA and miRNA. Common gene probes included in multi-probe tests include PCA3 and ERG, and the miRNAs miR-21 and miR-141. The next decade will likely bring further improvements in the diagnostic accuracy of biomarkers as well as insights into molecular biological mechanisms of action that can be translated into opportunities in precision uro-oncology.

Development and Validation of an 18-Gene Urine Test for High-Grade Prostate Cancer

Importance

Benefits of prostate cancer (PCa) screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) alone are largely offset by excess negative biopsies and overdetection of indolent cancers resulting from the poor specificity of PSA for high-grade PCa (ie, grade group [GG] 2 or greater).

Objective

To develop a multiplex urinary panel for high-grade PCa and validate its external performance relative to current guideline-endorsed biomarkers.

Design, Setting, and Participants

RNA sequencing analysis of 58 724 genes identified 54 markers of PCa, including 17 markers uniquely overexpressed by high-grade cancers. Gene expression and clinical factors were modeled in a new urinary test for high-grade PCa (MyProstateScore 2.0 [MPS2]). Optimal models were developed in parallel without prostate volume (MPS2) and with prostate volume (MPS2+). The locked models underwent blinded external validation in a prospective National Cancer Institute trial cohort. Data were collected from January 2008 to December 2020, and data were analyzed from November 2022 to November 2023.

Exposure

Protocolized blood and urine collection and transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic prostate biopsy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Multiple biomarker tests were assessed in the validation cohort, including serum PSA alone, the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator, and the Prostate Health Index (PHI) as well as derived multiplex 2-gene and 3-gene models, the original 2-gene MPS test, and the 18-gene MPS2 models. Under a testing approach with 95% sensitivity for PCa of GG 2 or greater, measures of diagnostic accuracy and clinical consequences of testing were calculated. Cancers of GG 3 or greater were assessed secondarily.

Results

Of 761 men included in the development cohort, the median (IQR) age was 63 (58-68) years, and the median (IQR) PSA level was 5.6 (4.6-7.2) ng/mL; of 743 men included in the validation cohort, the median (IQR) age was 62 (57-68) years, and the median (IQR) PSA level was 5.6 (4.1-8.0) ng/mL. In the validation cohort, 151 (20.3%) had high-grade PCa on biopsy. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values were 0.60 using PSA alone, 0.66 using the risk calculator, 0.77 using PHI, 0.76 using the derived multiplex 2-gene model, 0.72 using the derived multiplex 3-gene model, and 0.74 using the original MPS model compared with 0.81 using the MPS2 model and 0.82 using the MPS2+ model. At 95% sensitivity, the MPS2 model would have reduced unnecessary biopsies performed in the initial biopsy population (range for other tests, 15% to 30%; range for MPS2, 35% to 42%) and repeat biopsy population (range for other tests, 9% to 21%; range for MPS2, 46% to 51%). Across pertinent subgroups, the MPS2 models had negative predictive values of 95% to 99% for cancers of GG 2 or greater and of 99% for cancers of GG 3 or greater.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, a new 18-gene PCa test had higher diagnostic accuracy for high-grade PCa relative to existing biomarker tests. Clinically, use of this test would have meaningfully reduced unnecessary biopsies performed while maintaining highly sensitive detection of high-grade cancers. These data support use of this new PCa biomarker test in patients with elevated PSA levels to reduce the potential harms of PCa screening while preserving its long-term benefits.

Electrochemical LAMP-based assay for detection of RNA biomarkers in prostate cancer

Current molecular diagnostics of prostate cancer relies on detection of elevated levels of PSA protein in serum, but its specificity has been questioned due to its higher levels also in non-malignant prostate diseases. A long non-coding RNA biomarker, PCA3, demonstrated excellent specificity for prostate cancer, and thus has become an interesting alternative to PSA monitoring. Its detection utilizes mostly reverse transcription PCR with optical detection, making the protocol longer and more expensive. To avoid PCR, we have developed an electrochemical assay coupled with LAMP, an isothermal amplification technique showing high sensitivities at constant temperatures and shorter reaction times. We amplified PCA3 RNA as well as PSA mRNA (serving as a control), hybridized LAMP products on magnetic beads and measured them with chronoamperometry at carbon electrode chips. We show good sensitivity and specificity for both biomarkers in prostate cancer cell lines, and successful detection of PCA3 in clinical samples, i.e., urine samples from 11 prostate cancer patients and 7 healthy controls, where we obtained excellent correlation with clinical data. This is to our knowledge a first such attempt to apply electrochemistry to determine two RNA biomarkers directly in urine samples of prostate cancer patients in a minimally invasive diagnostics format.