Literature DB >> 12878740

Effect of verification bias on screening for prostate cancer by measurement of prostate-specific antigen.

Rinaa S Punglia1, Anthony V D'Amico, William J Catalona, Kimberly A Roehl, Karen M Kuntz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The sensitivity and specificity of a screening test are biased when disease status is not verified in all subjects and when the likelihood of confirmation depends on the test result itself. We assessed the screening characteristics of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurement after correction for verification bias.
METHODS: Between 1995 and 2001, 6691 men underwent PSA-based screening for prostate cancer. Of these men, 705 (11 percent) subsequently underwent biopsy of the prostate. Under the assumption that the chance of undergoing a biopsy depends only on the PSA-test result and other observed clinical variables, we used a mathematical model to estimate adjusted receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) curves.
RESULTS: Adjusting for verification bias significantly increased the area under the ROC curve (i.e., the overall diagnostic performance) of the PSA test, as compared with an unadjusted analysis (0.86 vs. 0.69, P<0.001, for men less than 60 years of age; 0.72 vs. 0.62, P=0.008, for men 60 years of age or older). If the threshold PSA value for undergoing biopsy were set at 4.1 ng per milliliter, 82 percent of cancers in younger men and 65 percent of cancers in older men would be missed. A digital rectal examination that is abnormal but not suspicious for cancer does not affect the overall performance characteristics of the test.
CONCLUSIONS: A lower threshold level of PSA for recommending prostate biopsy, particularly in younger men, may improve the clinical value of the PSA test. Copyright 2003 Massachusetts Medical Society

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12878740     DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa021659

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  57 in total

1.  Screening without evidence of efficacy.

Authors:  Malcolm Law
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-02-07

2.  High result in prostate specific antigen test: repeated testing and free tests might help.

Authors:  Andrew M Davis
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-11-22

Review 3.  Effect of verification bias on the sensitivity of fecal occult blood testing: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Alan S Rosman; Mark A Korsten
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-05-25       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  "Where do we teach what?" Finding broad concepts in the medical school curriculum.

Authors:  Joshua C Denny; Jeffrey D Smithers; Brian Armstrong; Anderson Spickard
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Can the ST segment be saved?

Authors:  Michael S Lauer
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2005 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.952

6.  An examination of the dynamic changes in prostate-specific antigen occurring in a population-based cohort of men over time.

Authors:  Brant A Inman; Jingyu Zhang; Nilay D Shah; Brian T Denton
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2012-02-07       Impact factor: 5.588

7.  Twenty Years of PSA: From Prostate Antigen to Tumor Marker.

Authors:  Gabriela De Angelis; Harry G Rittenhouse; Stephen D Mikolajczyk; L Blair Shamel; Axel Semjonow
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2007

8.  Prediction of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in asthma patients using electronic medical records.

Authors:  Blanca E Himes; Yi Dai; Isaac S Kohane; Scott T Weiss; Marco F Ramoni
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2009-03-04       Impact factor: 4.497

9.  Updated nomogram to predict pathologic stage of prostate cancer given prostate-specific antigen level, clinical stage, and biopsy Gleason score (Partin tables) based on cases from 2000 to 2005.

Authors:  Danil V Makarov; Bruce J Trock; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Leslie A Mangold; Patrick C Walsh; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Validation in a multiple urology practice cohort of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial calculator for predicting prostate cancer detection.

Authors:  Stephen J Eyre; Donna P Ankerst; John T Wei; Prakash V Nair; Meredith M Regan; Gerrardina Bueti; Jeffrey Tang; Mark A Rubin; Michael Kearney; Ian M Thompson; Martin G Sanda
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 7.450

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.