BACKGROUND: The recent rapid increase of mass screening for prostate cancer by measuring PSA in Japan will increase the economic burden to the healthcare system. PSA Rapid Test (PRT) is a simple inexpensive test. The usefulness of PRT as a primary screening test for prostate cancer was evaluated. METHODS: When we conducted educational lectures for prostate cancer in our city, screening for prostate cancer using PRT was offered to the male participants. The results of the tests were handed to participants in writing at the end of the lectures. When the results were judged as positive, letters of referral to our institute were enclosed. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen (18.6%) of 614 men were judged as positive by PRT. Of the 114 men with positive PRT, 73 (64%) visited our institution. Finally, 37 men underwent a transrectal prostate biopsy and a diagnosis of prostate cancer was made in 21 men (3.4% of all participants). The total costs for the PSA tests in this study were summed to be approximately $2,300, while they would be approximately $9,200 if all participants had undergone screening using the conventional quantitative method from the outset. CONCLUSION: PRT is a low-cost method to detect patients with prostate cancer. We believe the PRT is useful as an initial screening test for detecting prostate cancer and that the combination of the PRT and more precise quantitative testing would be a reasonable way to reduce the cost and achieve high detection rate.
BACKGROUND: The recent rapid increase of mass screening for prostate cancer by measuring PSA in Japan will increase the economic burden to the healthcare system. PSA Rapid Test (PRT) is a simple inexpensive test. The usefulness of PRT as a primary screening test for prostate cancer was evaluated. METHODS: When we conducted educational lectures for prostate cancer in our city, screening for prostate cancer using PRT was offered to the male participants. The results of the tests were handed to participants in writing at the end of the lectures. When the results were judged as positive, letters of referral to our institute were enclosed. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen (18.6%) of 614 men were judged as positive by PRT. Of the 114 men with positive PRT, 73 (64%) visited our institution. Finally, 37 men underwent a transrectal prostate biopsy and a diagnosis of prostate cancer was made in 21 men (3.4% of all participants). The total costs for the PSA tests in this study were summed to be approximately $2,300, while they would be approximately $9,200 if all participants had undergone screening using the conventional quantitative method from the outset. CONCLUSION: PRT is a low-cost method to detect patients with prostate cancer. We believe the PRT is useful as an initial screening test for detecting prostate cancer and that the combination of the PRT and more precise quantitative testing would be a reasonable way to reduce the cost and achieve high detection rate.
Authors: M Kobayashi; Y Takezawa; S Nakata; M Inoue; H Kurihara; T Kondo; N Kosaku; K Matsumoto; H Nakazato; H Yamanaka Journal: Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi Date: 2000-01
Authors: William J Catalona; Jerome P Richie; Frederick R Ahmann; M'Liss A Hudson; Peter T Scardino; Robert C Flanigan; Jean B DeKernion; Timothy L Ratliff; Louis R Kavoussi; Bruce L Dalkin; W Bedford Waters; Michael T MacFarlane; Paula C Southwick Journal: J Urol Date: 1994-05 Impact factor: 7.450