scholarly journals Evaluating the Use of Prostate-Specific Antigen as an Instrument for Early Detection of Prostate Cancer beyond Urologists: Results of a Representative Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study of General Practitioners and Internal Specialists

2014 ◽  
Vol 93 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Gilfrich ◽  
Matthias May ◽  
Kay-Patrick Braun ◽  
Steffen Lebentrau ◽  
Mike Lehsnau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Questionnaire Study ◽  
Cross Sectional

scholarly journals Early detection of prostate cancer local recurrence by urinary prostate-specific antigen

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stéphane Bolduc ◽  
Brant A. Inman ◽  
Louis Lacombe ◽  
Yves Fradet ◽  
Roland R. Tremblay
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Laboratory Assessment ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Prostatectomie Radicale ◽  
Psa Recurrence ◽  
Patients Atteints De Cancer

Purpose: We assessed the role of urinary prostate-specific antigen(uPSA) in the follow-up of prostate cancer after retropubic radicalprostatectomy (RRP) for the early detection of local recurrences.Methods: We recruited 50 patients previously treated for prostatecancer with RRP and who had not experienced a prostatespecificantigen (PSA) recurrence within their first postoperativeyear into a cross-sectional laboratory assessment and prospective6-year longitudinal follow-up study. We defined biochemicalfailure as a serum PSA (sPSA) of 0.3 μg/L or greater. Patientsprovided blood samples and a 50-mL sample of first-voided urine.We performed Wilcoxon rank-sum and Fisher exact tests for statisticalanalysis.Results: The median sPSA was 0.13 μg/L. The median uPSA was0.8 μg/L, and was not significantly different when comparingGleason scores or pathological stages. Of the 50 patients, 27 initiallyhad a nondetectable sPSA but a detectable uPSA, and11 patients experienced sPSA failure after 6 years. Six patients haddetectable sPSA and uPSA initially. Fifteen patients were negativefor both sPSA and uPSA, and 13 remained sPSA-free after 6 years.The odds ratio (OR) of having sPSA failure given a positive uPSAtest was 4.5 if sPSA was undetectable, but was reduced to 2.6 ifsPSA was detectable. The pooled Mantel–Haenszel OR of 4.2 suggestedthat a detectable uPSA quadrupled the risk of recurrence,independent of whether sPSA was elevated or not. The sensitivityof uPSA for detecting future sPSA recurrences was 81% andspecificity was 45%.Conclusion: Urinary PSA could contribute to an early detection oflocal recurrences of prostate cancer after a radical prostatectomy.Objectif : Nous avons évalué le rôle de l’antigène prostatiquespécifique (APS) urinaire dans le suivi du cancer de la prostateaprès prostatectomie radicale rétropubienne (PRR) pour le dépistageprécoce de récidives locales.Méthodes : Cinquante patients atteints de cancer de la prostatetraités par PRR et n’ayant présenté aucune récidive avec anomaliede l’APS dans l’année suivant l’intervention chirurgicale ontété inscrits à une étude transversale par épreuves de laboratoireavec suivi longitudinal prospectif sur 6 ans. L’échec sur le planbiochimique était défini comme un taux d’APS sérique de 0,3 μg/Lou plus. Les patients devaient fournir des échantillons de sanget un échantillon d’urine du matin de 50 mL. Les analyses statistiquesreposaient sur le test de Wilcoxon et la méthode exactede Fisher.Résultats : La valeur médiane de l’APS sérique était de 0,13 μg/L.La valeur médiane de l’APS urinaire était de 0,8 μg/L; la différenceétait non significative quand on tenait compte des scores deGleason ou des stades pathologiques. Sur les 50 patients,27 présentaient des taux d’APS sérique non décelables au début,mais des taux d’APS urinaire décelables; 11 patients ont présentéun échec quant aux taux d’APS sérique après 6 ans. Six patientsavaient des taux d’APS sérique et urinaire décelables au départ.Quinze patients n’avaient aucun taux décelable d’APS sérique ouurinaire, et aucun APS sérique n’était toujours décelable chez13 patients après 6 ans. Le rapport de risque d’un échec quantaux taux d’APS sérique après détection d’APS urinaire est de 4,5en l’absence d’un taux d’APS sérique décelable, mais diminueà 2,6 en présence d’un taux d’APS sérique décelable. Le rapportde risque cumulé de 4,21 calculé par la méthode deMantel–Haenszel porte à croire que des taux d’APS urinaire décelablesquadruplent le risque de présenter une récidive, queles taux sériques soient élevés ou non. La sensibilité du test dedépistage de l’APS urinaire pour la détection des récidives avecanomalie des taux sériques était de 81 %, et la spécificité, de 45 %.Conclusion : Le taux d’APS urinaire peut contribuer à un dépistageprécoce des récidives locales après une prostatectomie radicale.

Complexed prostate-specific antigen for early detection of prostate cancer in men with serum prostate-specific antigen levels of 2 to 4 nanograms per milliliter

Urology ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 31-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Horninger ◽  
Carol D Cheli ◽  
Richard J Babaian ◽  
Herbert A Fritsche ◽  
Herbert Lepor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Serum Prostate Specific Antigen

Early Detection of Residual Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy by an Ultrasensitive Assay for Prostate Specific Antigen

1993 ◽  
Vol 149 (4) ◽  
pp. 787-792 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas A. Stamey ◽  
Howard C.B. Graves ◽  
Nancy Wehner ◽  
Michelle Ferrari ◽  
Fuad S. Freiha
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Ultrasensitive Assay

Comparing Two Modalities of Screening for Prostate Cancer: Digital Rectal Examination + Transrectal Ultrasonography Vs. Prostate-Specific Antigen

1995 ◽  
Vol 81 (4) ◽  
pp. 225-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Ciatto ◽  
Rita Bonardi ◽  
Antonia Mazzotta ◽  
Claudio Lombardi ◽  
Roberto Santoni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Transrectal Ultrasonography ◽  
Attendance Rate ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Rectal Examination ◽  
Biopsy Rate

Aims and background To evaluate the performance and feasibility of screening for prostate cancer by comparing screening modalities. Methods Prospective study of two comparable cohorts of healthy resident males aged 60 to 75 years. Screening attenders in the two invited cohorts were screened either by digital rectal examination (DRE) and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS), or by serum prostate-specific antigen determination (PSA: cutoff 4 ng/ml). Attendance and biopsy rates, predictive values, prevalence of screen-detected cancers, as well as screening costs were determined, and the efficiency of the two screening modalities was compared. Results 1425 subjects were screened by DRE + TRUS. Attendance rate was 33.7%, the biopsy rate was 2.7%, and the prevalence of detected cancers was 1.82%. A total of 1315 subjects was screened by PSA. Attendance rate was 66.9%, the biopsy rate was 2.8%, and the prevalence of detected cancers was 1.67%. Screen-detected cancer stage was more favorable than observed in clinical practice, and early detection was evident, with the prevalence/incidence ratio higher than 10:1 in both programs. The cost per subject screened was about 34,000 Lire for DRE + TRSU and about 30,000 Lire for PSA program. Conclusions The study confirms that early detection of prostate cancer is possible and that screening is practically feasible. Both screening modalities achieved comparable results as regards early detection, but screening by PSA had a higher compliance and lower costs. PSA seems the ideal test to be used in prospective controlled studies aimed at demonstrating screening efficacy.

scholarly journals Relationship of Prostate Specific Antigen and Digital Rectal Examination in the Prediction of Prostate Cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-87
Author(s):  
Bhusan Raj Timilsina ◽  
Gaurav Devkota ◽  
Shweta Giri ◽  
Sulav Pradhan ◽  
Sudeep RaJ KC
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Rectal Examination ◽  
Relationship Of

Background: Prostate cancer is one of the most common and leading cause of death among different genitourinary causes. However, screening of prostate cancer is limited to Digital Rectal Examination (DRE) and Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) in Nepal. The aim of this study is to find out which modality is more helpful for the diagnosis of Prostate Cancer. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted in the department of Urology, College of Medical Sciences, Chitwan, Nepal. All patients included in this study were who presented to the OPD with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS). The patients were above the age of 40 with clinical suspicion prostate cancer based on either DRE or PSA.   Results: A total of 150 patients were enrolled from April 2019 to April 2020. Their mean± SD age was of 65.18±9.38 years. The accuracy of the diagnostic test for DRE and PSA were cut off at 4, PSA cut off range of 4 to 10, PSA cut off range of 10 to 30 and PSA cut off at 30 showed that all the screening indices were better for DRE (Sensitivity=100%, Specificity=59.2%, Diagnostic Accuracy=62.2%) than for PSA cut off at 4 (Sensitivity=100%, Specificity=27.6%, Diagnostic Accuracy=32.9%). Among various cut off score or ranges for PSA, cut off score at 30 provided the best screening indices with Sensitivity of 66.7%, Specificity of 97.4% and Diagnostic Accuracy of 95.1%. Conclusions: PSA has higher diagnostic accuracy then DRE. Keywords: DRE; LUTS; Prostate cancer; PSA.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document