Table 2.

Performance of serum prostate-specific antigen, Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial, and Mi-Prostate Score-based models for predicting cancer and high-grade cancer on biopsy

Model	Prediction	n	AUC	p value vs PSA (or PCPT)	p value vs T2:ERG or PCA3
PSA	Cancer	1225	0.585	NA	NA
PSA plus T2:ERG			0.693	<0.001	NA
PSA plus PCA3			0.726	<0.001	<0.05
PSA plus T2:ERG plus PCA3 (MiPS)			0.751	<0.001	<0.001, <0.001
PCPTrc	Cancer	1166	0.639	NA	NA
PCPTrc plus T2:ERG			0.718	<0.001	NA
PCPTrc plus PCA3			0.739	<0.001	NS
PCPTrc plus T2:ERG plus PCA3 (MiPS_PCPT)			0.762	<0.001	<0.001, <0.001
PSA	HG cancer	1225	0.651	NA	NA
PSA plus T2:ERG			0.729	<0.001	NA
PSA plus PCA3			0.747	<0.001	NS
PSA plus T2:ERG plus PCA3 (MiPShg)			0.772	<0.001	<0.01, <0.001
PCPThg	HG cancer	1218	0.707	NA	NA
PCPThg plus T2:ERG			0.754	<0.01	NA
PCPThg plus PCA3			0.752	<0.01	NS
PCPThg plus T2:ERG plus PCA3 (MiPS_PCPThg)			0.779	<0.001	<0.05, <0.001

AUC = area under the curve; HG = high grade; MiPS = Mi-Prostate Score; MiPShg = Mi-Prostate Score, high grade; NA = not available; NS = not significant; PCPThg = Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial high-grade risk calculator; PCPTrc = Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator; PSA = prostate-specific antigen; T2:ERG, TMPRSS2:ERG.

Trained logistic regression models incorporating urine T2:ERG and/or PCA3 scores along with serum PSA, the PCPTrc or PCPThg for predicting cancer or HG cancer (Gleason score >6) were evaluated in a separate validation cohort of 1225 evaluable patients. The number of patients with clinicopathologic information needed for the given model and informative urine samples are given, along with AUCs for each model. Significant differences in AUCs (for combined models compared with PSA (or PCPTrc-based models) are indicated. Significant differences for PSA plus T2:ERG vs PSA plus PCA3 models or MiPS vs PSA plus T2:ERG and PSA plus PCA3 models (or equivalent PCPTrc-based models) are also given.