Skip to content

Author

X. Filella

1 paper indexed here

We haven’t gathered this author’s papers yet. Follow them and we’ll fetch their work.

Not the right person? Other researchers publish under this name.

Review Open access Jul 2026

Standardization of prostate-specific antigen assays: Impact on reference intervals and clinical decision thresholds.

BackgroundProstate-specific antigen (PSA) remains the most widely used biomarker for prostate cancer screening, diagnosis, and monitoring. However, despite decades of standardization efforts, significant inter-assay variability persists, with important consequences for clinical interpretation and decision-making.ObjectiveThis review aims to evaluate the impact of PSA calibration and harmonization on reference intervals, clinical thresholds, and population-based screening strategies in contemporary clinical practice.MethodsA literature-based analysis was conducted, examining studies on PSA assay standardization, analytical variability, and evidence from population screening trials, including considerations from a Health Technology Assessment perspective.ResultsThe introduction of the World Health Organization (WHO) International Standard 96/670 improved comparability among PSA assays, yet clinically relevant differences between platforms remain. This variability is driven by differences in calibration, antibody specificity, epitope recognition, and assay design. As a result, PSA values are not directly interchangeable across assays, and assay-specific cut-offs may be necessary to maintain diagnostic performance. Historically established thresholds, such as the 4 μg/L cut-off and the "gray zone," were derived using specific assay systems and are influenced by methodological limitations. PSA-derived metrics, including PSA density, improve specificity but are still affected by inter-assay variability. Evidence from large randomized trials supports a PSA cut-off of 3.0 μg/L for population screening, showing a reduction in prostate cancer mortality when implemented within structured programs; however, this threshold is intrinsically linked to the analytical characteristics of the assays used. PSA also shows relevant intra-individual biological variability beyond analytical variation, with within-subject variation of 6-13%.ConclusionsPSA standardization remains incomplete, and inter-assay variability and biological variability continues to influence clinical interpretation. The implementation of PSA-based screening programs must explicitly consider the assay-specific nature of evidence-derived thresholds, including the 3.0 μg/L cut-off, to ensure consistent, effective, and safe clinical decision-making.

X. Filella · 0 citations