Chromogranin A as a biomarker for prostate cancer: is it actually relevant for clinical practice?

Cocaine and amphetamine regulated transcript (CART): a newly characterized neuropeptide in human prostate

Cocaine and amphetamine regulated transcript (CART) is a somatostatin-like polypeptide. CART has been localized in the CNS, hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenocortical (HPA) axis, pancreatic islets and enteric nervous system. We investigated the cellular localization of CART in normal human prostate, benign prostatic hyperplasia, prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and acinar adenocarcinoma. CART was assessed using immunohistochemistry (IHC) and in situ hybridization (ISH), and its gene expression was identified by RTqPCR. We found cellular expression of CART in both normal prostatic luminal secretory epithelial cells neuroendocrine cells (NEC) of both ducts and acini. The cellular appearance indicated a cycle of neuropeptide synthesis and secretion as validated by ISH/IHC concordance. RTqPCR analysis also validated the immunohistochemical data and gene expression, which both indicated low to moderate expression in prostatic tissues. CART expression also was increased in both neuroendocrine and glandular epithelial cell populations from samples of benign prostatic hyperplasia as validated by IHC, ISH and RTqPCR. CART expression was markedly diminished and, in some cases, entirely absent in tissues of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and adenocarcinoma. Owing to loss of CART expression in adenocarcinoma and its increase in benign prostatic hyperplasia, CART may prove to be an important prostate marker.

Small-Cell Carcinoma of the Prostate - Challenges of Diagnosis and Treatment: A Next of Kin and Physician Perspective Piece

This article was co-authored by a patient's relative describing their experiences of receiving a diagnosis and subsequent clinical management of a rare form of prostate cancer, neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC). The difficulty of receiving this diagnosis, particularly as this was terminal with no options for systemic treatment, and experiences throughout this process are detailed. The relative's questions regarding the care of her partner, NEPC and clinical management are answered. The treating physician's perspective regarding clinical management is enclosed. Prostate cancer remains one of the most common cancer diagnoses, with small-cell carcinoma (SCC) of the prostate representing 0.5-2% of these. Prostatic SCC frequently develops in patients previously treated for prostate adenocarcinoma, more rarely arising de novo. Diagnosis and management present clinical challenges owing to its rarity, frequently aggressive disease course, lack of specific diagnostic and monitoring biomarkers, and treatment limitations. Current pathophysiological understanding of prostatic SCC, genomics and contemporary and evolving treatment options in addition to current guidelines are discussed. Written principally from the patient's relatives and physician experience with discussion of current evidence, diagnostic and treatment options, we hope this piece is informative for both patients and healthcare professionals alike.

Chromogranin A: a useful biomarker in castration-resistant prostate cancer

PURPOSE

The natural history of prostate cancer (PC) almost always evolves to castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) status, sometimes comprising pure or mixed neuroendocrine prostate cancers (NEPC) differentiation. In CRPC, monitoring using only prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is not optimal since neuroendocrine differentiated cells do not secrete PSA. Thus, monitoring with PSA and chromogranin A (CgA) may be useful. This review aims to evaluate evidence for the usefulness of CgA assessments during the monitoring of prostate cancer.

METHOD

This review was based on three recent meta-analysis concerning CgA and prostate cancer. Further data were obtained from PubMed and Embase databases by searches using keywords, including chromogranin A and prostate cancer.

RESULTS

CgA levels remain largely unchanged during the early PC evolution. The development of NEPC is characterised by lower PSA secretion and increased CgA secretion. Data supporting the prognostic value of high CgA baseline levels for survival are contrasting and scarce. However, increasing CgA levels early during treatment of metastatic (m)CRPC suggests resistance to treatment and predicts shorter survival, particularly in men with high baseline levels of CgA levels. In men with mCRPC, the first-line chemotherapy may be more appropriate than other agents when baseline CgA levels are high. Also, increasing CgA levels during treatment may indicate disease progression and may warrant a change of therapy.

CONCLUSION

CgA monitoring at baseline and regularly during mCRPC management may be useful for monitoring disease evolution. An increased CgA baseline levels and increasing CgA levels may assist physicians with choosing and modifying therapy.

Evaluation of CisBio ELISA for Chromogranin A Measurement

BACKGROUND

Chromogranin A (CgA) is a nonspecific marker for the presence of neuroendocrine tumors and neuroendocrine differentiation. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of the CisBio CgA ELISA.

METHODS

Precision, linearity, limit of blank, and recovery of the CisBio CgA ELISA were evaluated. Seventy waste serum samples obtained from the clinical laboratory at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center were analyzed by the CisBio CgA ELISA. Results were compared to those obtained from a reference laboratory that used a proprietary ELISA for serum CgA measurement. Paired waste plasma samples were also collected from 24 of these patients to assess possible differences between CgA in serum and plasma. Finally, a preliminary reference range study was performed with samples from healthy volunteers in serum (n = 60) and plasma (n = 60).

RESULTS

Within-run and between-run precision ranged from 3.0% to 5.1% and 4.8% to 12.9%, respectively. The limit of blank was 2.4 ng/mL. Recovery ranged from 88% to 102%. A statistically significant bias was observed when the CisBio CgA assay results were compared to those of a reference laboratory. Comparison of the 2 assays yielded a slope of 9.05, intercept of -18.0, and a correlation coefficient of 0.955. CgA values in serum correlated well to values measured in plasma.

CONCLUSIONS

The analytical performance of the CisBio CgA ELISA was acceptable. However, CgA results are method-specific owing to lack of standardization and use of different antibodies. This lack of standardization results in several challenges for the clinical laboratory when evaluating a CgA assay.