Abstract:

Purpose: Prostate cancer is ranked second among cancer-related deaths in men. In the diagnosis of PCa, rectal examination with the finger, serum PSA and biopsy are the main tools used. The low autonomy of PSA causes unnecessary biopsy. Therefore, there is a need for biobelirtecs with high autonomy. There are studies on the role of sarcosin in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. However, due to the differences in work designs, the results are not comparable. In the study, we aimed at comparing the performance of proPSA in the diagnosis of urine sarcosin with existing biobelirectors. Method and method: A total of 105 patients conducted a prostate biopsy were taken to study. These patients were compared by measuring their levels of sarcosin in the urine with PSA, fPSA, %fPSA, p2PSA, prostate volume and phi. Diagnostic performance of these parameters was assessed by ROC curve analysis and cutting values, sensitivity and peculiarities were compared. The PCa patients were also studied by the Gleason scores (<7 and ≥7) dividing them into two groups. Results: Serum PSA, p2PSA and urine sarcosin levels were not statistically different, although they were higher in the biopsy positive group. However, the phi value was significantly higher in the biopsy positive group, while the %fPSA and PV values were lower. Sarcosin and PSA were significantly high in the GS ≥ 7 group. In the cutting values with the sensitivity of the indicators of 90%, respectively, the peculiarities of %fPSA, PV and phi were higher than PSA. The result: Urine sarcosin alone was not sufficient in the diagnosis of PCa, it was found that it could be used in patients with a risk of PCa with GS ≥ 7. Phi, %fPSA and PV were found to be better than PSA in PCa diagnosis. In addition, it was found that PV could improve Phi's personality.