Literature DB >> 11605730

Predicting prostate biopsy outcome by findings at digital rectal examination, transrectal ultrasonography, PSA, PSA density and free-to-total PSA ratio in a population-based screening setting.

S Ciatto1, R Bonardi, C Lombardi, G Cappelli, A Castagnoli, A D'Agata, M Zappa, G Gervasi.   

Abstract

The study offers a retrospective analysis of the positive predictive value (PPV) of several variables, i.e. digital rectal examination (DRE), transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS), PSA value, PSA density (PSAD), and free/total PSA ratio (F/T), for the histologic outcome of 179 prostate biopsies performed within a population-based screening trial. The ratio of spared benign biopsies to missed cancers (SBB/MC) if biopsy results had been decided on the basis of single variables was also evaluated. PPV was 82.9% for DRE, 56.3% for TRUS, 26.6% for PSA (cutoff > or =4 ng/mL), 47.4% for PSA (cutoff > or =10 ng/mL), 42.0% for PSAD (cutoff 0.15), 59.2% for PSAD (cutoff 0.20), 34.9% for F/T (cutoff 0.20) and 40.0% for F/T (cutoff 0.15). SBB/MC was 121/23 for DRE, 96/12 for TRUS, 11/10 for PSA (cutoff > or =4 ng/mL), 107/34 for PSA (cutoff > or =10 ng/mL), 87/23 for PSAD (cutoff 0.15), 109/26 for PSAD (cutoff 0.20), 45/8 for F/T (cutoff 0.20) and 70/14 for F/T (cutoff 0.15). Multivariate analysis of the association with biopsy outcome showed the highest odds ratio for TRUS (13.24, 95% CI=4.4-30.7), and considerably lower values for DRE (4.17, 95% CI=2.0-8-9), PSAD (cutoff 0.20: 3.24, 95% CI=-1.8-5.7) and F/T (cutoff <0.15: 3.16, 95% CI=1.7-1.8). None of the possible variable combinations was clinically useful: the highest PPV (83.3%) was obtained with a combination of suspicious DRE/TRUS, PSAD >0.20 and F/T <0.15, which nevertheless missed 20 of 52 cancers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11605730     DOI: 10.1177/172460080101600304

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Biol Markers        ISSN: 0393-6155            Impact factor:   3.248


  2 in total

1.  "Finding the needle in a haystack": oncologic evaluation of patients treated for LUTS with holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

Authors:  Annika Herlemann; Kerstin Wegner; Alexander Roosen; Alexander Buchner; Philipp Weinhold; Alexander Bachmann; Christian G Stief; Christian Gratzke; Giuseppe Magistro
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-05-17       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Clinical significance of multiparametric MRI and PSA density as predictors of residual tumor (pT0) following radical prostatectomy for T1a-T1b (incidental) prostate cancer.

Authors:  Doo Yong Chung; Hyeok Jun Goh; Dong Hoon Koh; Min Seok Kim; Jong Soo Lee; Won Sik Jang; Young Deuk Choi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-28       Impact factor: 3.240

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.