OBJECTIVES: Currently, many clinicians do not recommend prostate biopsy for men with digital rectal examination (DRE) results that are not suspicious for cancer and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values between 2.51 and 4 ng/mL. We propose a new model for the detection of prostate cancer using the percentage of free PSA (%FPSA) in the limited range of PSA values between 2.51 and 4 ng/mL that maximizes clinical specificity (ie, minimizes false-positive results). This model identifies higher risk patients in this relatively low-risk population. METHODS: Three hundred sixty-eight archived serum samples from men evaluated and treated at two academic institutions were reviewed. All men had a histologic diagnosis, findings not suspicious for cancer on DRE, and PSA levels between 2.51 and 4 ng/mL. Samples were tested in Hybritech's Tandem-R PSA and Tandem-R free PSA (FPSA) assays in the same laboratory at each institution. RESULTS: Various models for cancer detection using %FPSA when PSA is 2.51 to 4 ng/mL and DRE is not suspicious for cancer are proposed. These models recommend biopsy for only 10% to 36% of the men in this population and would identify as many as 30% to 54% of the detectable cancers. There is evidence that the cancers that would be detected are the most aggressive cancers in this population. CONCLUSIONS: Our models identified men with a higher risk of prostate cancer in a relatively low-risk population that currently does not routinely undergo biopsy. This may allow for a more cost-effective way to increase cancer detection when PSA values are between 2.51 and 4 ng/mL and DRE is not suspicious for cancer. This model has the potential to detect a greater number of clinically important and potentially curable cancers than would be detected with current practice.
OBJECTIVES: Currently, many clinicians do not recommend prostate biopsy for men with digital rectal examination (DRE) results that are not suspicious for cancer and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values between 2.51 and 4 ng/mL. We propose a new model for the detection of prostate cancer using the percentage of free PSA (%FPSA) in the limited range of PSA values between 2.51 and 4 ng/mL that maximizes clinical specificity (ie, minimizes false-positive results). This model identifies higher risk patients in this relatively low-risk population. METHODS: Three hundred sixty-eight archived serum samples from men evaluated and treated at two academic institutions were reviewed. All men had a histologic diagnosis, findings not suspicious for cancer on DRE, and PSA levels between 2.51 and 4 ng/mL. Samples were tested in Hybritech's Tandem-R PSA and Tandem-R free PSA (FPSA) assays in the same laboratory at each institution. RESULTS: Various models for cancer detection using %FPSA when PSA is 2.51 to 4 ng/mL and DRE is not suspicious for cancer are proposed. These models recommend biopsy for only 10% to 36% of the men in this population and would identify as many as 30% to 54% of the detectable cancers. There is evidence that the cancers that would be detected are the most aggressive cancers in this population. CONCLUSIONS: Our models identified men with a higher risk of prostate cancer in a relatively low-risk population that currently does not routinely undergo biopsy. This may allow for a more cost-effective way to increase cancer detection when PSA values are between 2.51 and 4 ng/mL and DRE is not suspicious for cancer. This model has the potential to detect a greater number of clinically important and potentially curable cancers than would be detected with current practice.
Authors: Carsten Stephan; Chuanliang Xu; Henning Cammann; Markus Graefen; Alexander Haese; Hartwig Huland; Axel Semjonow; Eleftherios P Diamandis; Mesut Remzi; Bob Djavan; Mark F Wildhagen; Bert G Blijenberg; Patrik Finne; Ulf-Hakan Stenman; Klaus Jung; Hellmuth-Alexander Meyer Journal: World J Urol Date: 2007-02-28 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: C Stephan; B Vogel; H Cammann; M Lein; V Klevecka; P Sinha; G Kristiansen; D Schnorr; K Jung; S A Loening Journal: Urologe A Date: 2003-03-22 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: Isabel Heidegger; Viktor Skradski; Eberhard Steiner; Helmut Klocker; Renate Pichler; Andreas Pircher; Wolfgang Horninger; Jasmin Bektic Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-02-06 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: G Pourmand; R Ramezani; B Sabahgoulian; F Nadali; Ar Mehrsai; Mr Nikoobakht; F Allameh; Sh Hossieni; A Seraji; M Rezai; F Haidari; S Dehghani; R Razmandeh; B Pourmand Journal: Iran J Public Health Date: 2012-02-29 Impact factor: 1.429