Abstract:collected for each patient before biopsy. The study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Review Board at Huashan Hospital and written informed consent was completed for each patient. Because the Hologic PCA3 kit is not currently available in China, urine PCA3 RNA level was measured using an in-house qPCR method and its level was normalized by urine levels of PSA mRNA. PCA3 level was calculated using ∆Ct = CtPCA3 − CtPSA. 8 Twenty-nine PCa risk-associated SNPs discovered from GWAS and confirmed in the Chinese population (P < 0.05) were genotyped using MassARRAY iPLEX (Sequenom, Inc., CA, USA).9 A GRS was calculated for each subject based on their genotypes at these 29 SNPs and weighted by odd ratios of these SNPs derived from an external study.10 Association of PCa diagnosis with PCA3, GRS, and other clinical variables were tested using both univariate and multivariate analyses. Total PSA, PCA3, free to total PSA ratio, and GRS were log-transformed prior to statistical tests. The key demographic and clinical variables for the 99 patients in the cohort, as well as their association with PCa risk, are presented in Table 1. Based on univariate analysis, higher PCA3 (P = 0.0002), higher total PSA (P = 0.0002), higher GRS (P = 0.0008), lower free to total PSA ratio (P = 0.007), and smaller prostate volume (P = 0.0003) were each associated with increased risk for PCa. The performance for discriminating PCa from non-PCa, measured by area under the curve (AUC), was 0.73 for total PSA, 0.77 for PCA3, and 0.70 for GRS. We also examined in detail the added value of PCA3 and GRS to total PSA in discriminating prostate biopsy outcomes (Table 2). Compared to Model 1 with total PSA alone where AUC was 0.73, the AUC increased to 0.81 for Model 2 with total PSA and GRS (P = 0.05), and to 0.84 for Model 3 with total PSA and PCA3 (P = 0.01). The AUC for Model 4 with all three variables (total PSA, GRS and PCA3) was further increased to 0.86, although the improvement was not statistically significant over Model 2 (P = 0.08) or Model 3 (P = 0.34). When all six variables were considered together in a multivariate analysis, only three variables were independently associated with PCa risk from a multivariate analysis; total PSA (P = 0.001), prostate volume (P = 0.0001), and PCA3 (P = 0.027). The AUC of the best multivariate model for discriminating PCa from non-PCa was excellent at 0.94. Dear Editor, We report here the performance of prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) and genetic risk score (GRS) in predicting prostate cancer (PCa) from the prostate biopsy. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of simultaneously evaluating these two biomarkers in the same study. The incidence of PCa has increased in China over the last two decades, likely due to a combination of factors such as increase in life expectancy, better detection method of PCa, and life style changes.1 PCa is typically diagnosed from the prostate biopsy in patients with elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels. However, for moderately elevated PSA levels, its specificity for PCa is relatively low because other prostate disorders may also lead to elevated PSA levels.2 Therefore, additional biomarkers are needed to complement PSA to better identify patients that may benefit from prostate biopsy. Two recently proposed biomarkers of PCa are promising. The first is a urine biomarker (PCA3), a noncoding RNA that was first reported in 1991 to have higher expression in prostate tumors than normal or benign prostate tissue.3 Since then several studies found that it can also be detected in the urine after digital rectal exam (DRE).4,5 A urine PCA3 test for considering a repeat biopsy in men 50 years of age or older who have had one or more previous negative prostate biopsies by Hologic Gen-Probe was approved by the European Medicines Agency and the United States Food and Drug Administration in 2012. The second is GRS derived from multiple PCa risk-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) identified from genome-wide association studies (GWAS).6,7 Although each of these two biomarkers has been evaluated individually, the combined effect of these two biomarkers in predicting PCa from the prostate biopsy have not been reported. We assessed the joint effect of these two biomarkers in a biopsy cohort of the Chinese population. Subjects in this study were patients scheduled for needle prostate biopsy at Huashan Hospital, Shanghai, China during 2012 and 2013. Blood samples and post-DRE urine were LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Performance of Three Inherited Risk Measures for Predicting Prostate Cancer Incidence and Mortality: A Population-based Prospective Analysis

Evaluating the predictive value of genetic risk score in colorectal cancer among Chinese Han population

Development and External Multicenter Validation of Chinese Prostate Cancer Consortium Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator for Initial Prostate Biopsy.

Broad- and narrow-sense validity performance of three polygenic risk score methods for prostate cancer risk assessment

Race-specific Genetic Risk Score is More Accurate Than Nonrace-Specific Genetic Risk Score for Predicting Prostate Cancer and High-Grade Diseases

Prostate cancer risk stratification improvement across multiple ancestries with new polygenic hazard score

Influence of Age on Predictiveness of Genetic Risk Score for Prostate Cancer in a Chinese Hospital-Based Biopsy Cohort.

Predictive performance of prostate cancer risk in Chinese men using 33 reported prostate cancer risk-associated SNPs.

The Combined Effect of Polygenic Risk Score and Prostate Health Index in Chinese Men Undergoing Prostate Biopsy

Prostate Cancer Antigen 3 and Genetic Risk Score As Markers for the Detection of Prostate Cancer in the Chinese Population.

Concept And Benchmarks For Assessing Narrow-Sense Validity Of Genetic Risk Score Values

Calibration of polygenic risk scores is required prior to clinical implementation: results of three common cancers in UKB

Abstract 4801: Clinical polygenic model to stratify risk of any, metastatic, and fatal prostate cancer in a randomized controlled trial of precision screening

Systematic evaluation of narrow-sense validity of polygenic risk score for prostate cancer in a Chinese prostate biopsy cohort

How Well do Polygenic Risk Scores Identify Men at High Risk for Prostate Cancer? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Clinical features of prostate cancer by polygenic risk score

Prediction of Prostate Cancer from Prostate Biopsy in Chinese Men Using a Genetic Score Derived from 24 Prostate Cancer Risk-Associated SNPs

The impact of genomic biomarkers on a clinical risk prediction model for upgrading/upstaging among men with favorable‐risk prostate cancer

Germline Mutations in DNA Repair Genes in a Large Series of Unselected Chinese Prostate Cancer Patients.

Validation of the Novel Susceptibility Loci for Prostate Cancer in a Chinese Population.

Understanding the Biological Basis of Polygenic Risk Scores and Disparities in Prostate Cancer: A Comprehensive Genomic Analysis