Prostate Volume Index Is Able to Differentiate between Prostatic Chronic Inflammation and Prostate Cancer in Patients with Normal Digital Rectal Examination and Prostate-Specific Antigen Values <10 ng/mL: Results of 564 Biopsy Naïve Cases

2019 ◽  
Vol 103 (4) ◽  
pp. 415-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio B. Porcaro ◽  
Alessandro Tafuri ◽  
Marco Sebben ◽  
Giovanni Novella ◽  
Tania Processali ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Chronic Inflammation ◽  
Prostate Volume ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Volume Index ◽  
Rectal Examination

scholarly journals Clinical diagnosis of prostate cancer using digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen tests: a systematic review and meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nelson C. Okpua ◽  
Simon I. Okekpa ◽  
Stanley Njaka ◽  
Augusta N. Emeh
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Antigen Test ◽  
Rectal Examination ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen Test ◽  
Prostate Cancers ◽  
Antigen Tests

Abstract Background Being diagnosed with cancer, irrespective of type initiates a serious psychological concern. The increasing rate of detection of indolent prostate cancers is a source of worry to public health. Digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen tests are the commonly used prostate cancer screening tests. Understanding the diagnostic accuracies of these tests may provide clearer pictures of their characteristics and values in prostate cancer diagnosis. This review compared the sensitivities and specificities of digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen test in detection of clinically important prostate cancers using studies from wider population. Main body We conducted literature search in PubMed, Medline, Science Direct, Wiley Online, CINAHL, Scopus, AJOL and Google Scholar, using key words and Boolean operators. Studies comparing the sensitivity and specificity of digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen tests in men 40 years and above, using biopsy as reference standard were retrieved. Data were extracted and analysed using Review manager (RevMan 5.3) statistical software. The overall quality of the studies was good, and heterogeneity was observed across the studies. The result comparatively shows that prostate-specific antigen test has higher sensitivity (P < 0.00001, RR 0.74, CI 0.67–0.83) and specificity (P < 0.00001, RR 1.81, CI 1.54–2.12) in the detection of prostate cancers than digital rectal examination. Conclusion Prostate-specific antigen test has higher sensitivity and specificity in detecting prostate cancers from men of multiple ethnic origins. However, combination of prostate-specific antigen test and standardized digital rectal examination procedure, along with patients history, may improve the accuracy and minimize over-diagnoses of indolent prostate cancers.

scholarly journals Integrated predictive model for prostatic cancer using clinical, laboratory and ultrasound data

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 430-437
Author(s):  
GUSTAVO DAVID LUDWIG ◽  
HENRIQUE PERES ROCHA ◽  
LÚCIO JOSÉ BOTELHO ◽  
MAIARA BRUSCO FREITAS
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Predictive Model ◽  
Prostate Biopsy ◽  
Clinical Laboratory ◽  
Prostate Volume ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Roc Curves ◽  
Rectal Examination ◽  
Psa Density

ABSTRACT Objective: to develop a predictive model to estimate the probability of prostate cancer prior to biopsy. Methods: from September 2009 to January 2014, 445 men underwent prostate biopsy in a radiology service. We excluded from the study patients with diseases that could compromise the data analysis, who had undergone prostatic resection or used 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors. Thus, we selected 412 patients. Variables included in the model were age, prostate specific antigen (PSA), digital rectal examination, prostate volume and abnormal sonographic findings. We constructed Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and calculated the areas under the curve, as well as the model's Positive Predictive Value (PPV) . Results: of the 412 men, 155 (37.62%) had prostate cancer (PC). The mean age was 63.8 years and the median PSA was 7.22ng/ml. In addition, 21.6% and 20.6% of patients had abnormalities on digital rectal examination and image suggestive of cancer by ultrasound, respectively. The median prostate volume and PSA density were 45.15cm3 and 0.15ng/ml/cm3, respectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that only five studied risk factors are predictors of PC in the study (p<0.05). The PSA density was excluded from the model (p=0.314). The area under the ROC curve for PC prediction was 0.86. The PPV was 48.08% for 95%sensitivity and 52.37% for 90% sensitivity. Conclusion: the results indicate that clinical, laboratory and ultrasound data, besides easily obtained, can better stratify the risk of patients undergoing prostate biopsy.

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.

Occupation as a predictor of prostate cancer screening behaviour in Canada

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 215-222
Author(s):  
Cheryl E Peters ◽  
Paul J Villeneuve ◽  
Marie-Élise Parent
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Antigen Test ◽  
Screening Practices ◽  
Rectal Examination ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen Test

Objectives If prostate cancer screening practices relate to occupation, this would have important implications when studying the aetiological role of workplace exposures on prostate cancer. We identified variations in screening by occupation among men in Montreal, Canada (2005–2012). Methods Prostate specific antigen testing and digital rectal examination (ever-screened and frequency of screening, previous five years) were examined among population controls from the Prostate Cancer & Environment Study. Face-to-face interviews elicited lifestyle and occupational histories. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of ever-screening for the longest-held occupation, adjusting for potential confounders. Negative binomial models were used to examine relationships with screening frequency. Results Among 1989 controls, 81% reported ever having had a prostate specific antigen test, and 77% a digital rectal examination. Approximately 40% of men reported having a prostate specific antigen test once a year, on average. Compared with those in management or administrative jobs, men in primary industry (odds ratio 0.26, 95% confidence interval 0.10–0.65), construction (0.44, 0.25–0.79), machining (0.45, 0.21–0.97), and teaching (0.37, 0.20–0.70) were less likely to have undergone prostate specific antigen screening. Results were similar when considering the most recent job. Conclusions Our findings highlight substantial variations in prostate cancer screening by occupation. Men in occupations where carcinogen exposures are more common are less likely to participate in prostate screening activities. This could be an important source of bias, and occupational studies of prostate cancer should account for screening practices.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document