Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
In This Section

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Published in Association with the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)

Editor-in-Chief: Plebani, Mario

Ed. by Gillery, Philippe / Lackner, Karl J. / Lippi, Giuseppe / Melichar, Bohuslav / Payne, Deborah A. / Schlattmann, Peter / Tate, Jillian R.

12 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2016: 3.432

CiteScore 2016: 2.21

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.873
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.982

Online
ISSN
1437-4331
See all formats and pricing
In This Section
Volume 47, Issue 11 (Nov 2009)

Issues

Discordant total and free prostate-specific antigen (PSA) assays: does calibration with WHO reference materials diminish the problem?

Carsten Stephan
  • Department of Urology, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
/ Thomas Köpke
  • Department of Urology, Prostate Center, University Clinic Münster, Münster, Germany
/ Axel Semjonow
  • Department of Urology, Prostate Center, University Clinic Münster, Münster, Germany
/ Michael Lein
  • Department of Urology, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
  • Berlin Institute for Urologic Research, Berlin, Germany
/ Serdar Deger
  • Department of Urology, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
/ Mark Schrader
  • Department of Urology, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
/ Kurt Miller
  • Department of Urology, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
/ Klaus Jung
  • Department of Urology, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
  • Berlin Institute for Urologic Research, Berlin, Germany
Published Online: 2009-09-25 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2009.285

Abstract

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) assay-dependent variations could result in misinterpretation of individual PSA values. Therefore, the situation for clinical interpretation of PSA or percent free PSA (%fPSA) results is complicated. This review summarizes the differences in various total PSA (tPSA) and free PSA (fPSA) assays, and results obtained using the new World Health Organization (WHO) calibrated Access assays from various studies. Method comparisons between the traditionally calibrated Hybritech PSA and fPSA assays and the new “standardized” WHO calibrated assays yield results that are ∼25% lower for PSA and fPSA. A PSA cut-off of 3 or 3.1 μg/L should be considered for WHO calibrated assays in order to achieve the same sensitivity/specificity profile as with a cut-off of 4 μg/L in traditionally calibrated assays. The %fPSA cut-offs could be retained.

Clin Chem Lab Med 2009;47:1325–31.

Keywords: method comparison; prostate cancer; prostate-specific antigen; WHO PSA standards

About the article

Corresponding author: Prof. Dr. Klaus Jung, Department of Urology, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany Phone: +49-30-450 515041, Fax: +49-30-450 515904,


Received: 2009-06-21

Accepted: 2009-07-09

Published Online: 2009-09-25

Published in Print: 2009-11-01



Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, ISSN (Online) 1437-4331, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2009.285. Export Citation

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[2]
[3]
Eric W. Klee, Olga P. Bondar, Marcia K. Goodmanson, Sergey A. Trushin, Eric J. Bergstralh, Ravinder J. Singh, N. Leigh Anderson, and George G. Klee
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 2014, Volume 138, Number 10, Page 1381
[4]
Klaus Jung and Michael Lein
Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Reviews on Cancer, 2014, Volume 1846, Number 2, Page 425
[5]
S. Machtens, A. Roosen, C.G. Stief, and M.C. Truß
Der Urologe, 2014, Volume 53, Number 7, Page 1046
[6]
Axel Heidenreich, Patrick J. Bastian, Joaquim Bellmunt, Michel Bolla, Steven Joniau, Theodor van der Kwast, Malcolm Mason, Vsevolod Matveev, Thomas Wiegel, F. Zattoni, and Nicolas Mottet
European Urology, 2014, Volume 65, Number 1, Page 124
[7]
L. Foj, X Filella, J. Alcover, J. M. Augé, J. M. Escudero, and R. Molina
Tumor Biology, 2014, Volume 35, Number 3, Page 1867
[8]
A. Heidenreich, J. Bellmunt, M. Bolla, S. Joniau, M. Mason, V. Matveev, N. Mottet, H.P. Schmid, T. van der Kwast, T. Wiegel, and F. Zattoni
Actas Urológicas Españolas, 2011, Volume 35, Number 9, Page 501
[10]
Jin-Hee Cho, Chul-Moon Lee, Chul Min Park, Hee-Won Moon, Mina Hur, Yeo-Min Yun, Woochang Lee, Sail Chun, and Won-Ki Min
Laboratory Medicine Online, 2012, Volume 2, Number 3, Page 131
[11]
A. Heidenreich, J. Bellmunt, M. Bolla, S. Joniau, M. Mason, V. Matveev, N. Mottet, H.P. Schmid, T. van der Kwast, T. Wiegel, and F. Zattoni
Actas Urológicas Españolas (English Edition), 2011, Volume 35, Number 9, Page 501
[12]
Mauro Panteghini
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 2012, Volume 50, Number 7
[13]
Axel Heidenreich, Joaquim Bellmunt, Michel Bolla, Steven Joniau, Malcolm Mason, Vsevolod Matveev, Nicolas Mottet, Hans-Peter Schmid, Theo van der Kwast, Thomas Wiegel, and Filliberto Zattoni
European Urology, 2011, Volume 59, Number 1, Page 61

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in