PURPOSE: The Prostate CAncer gene 3 (PCA3) assay may guide prostate biopsy decisions and predict prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness. This study explored the appropriateness of (1) PCA3 testing; (2) biopsy; (3) active surveillance (AS) and the value of the PCA3 Score for biopsy and AS decisions. METHODS: Using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method, 12 urologists assessed the appropriateness of PCA3, biopsy and AS for theoretical patient profiles, constructed by combining clinical variables. They individually scored the appropriateness for all profiles using a 9-point scale. Based on the median score and extent of agreement, the appropriateness for each profile was calculated. RESULTS: The PCA3 Assay was mainly considered appropriate in men with ≥1 negative biopsy, PSA ≥ 3 ng/mL and life expectancy (LE) ≥10 years. A LE < 10 years, ≥2 negative biopsies and PCA3 Score <20 decreased biopsy appropriateness, while PSA ≥ 3 ng/mL and PCA3 Score >50 increased it. In men without a prior biopsy, LE ≥ 10 years and a suspicious DRE, PCA3 did not affect biopsy appropriateness. In other men, a PCA3 Score <20 discouraged biopsy, while a value ≥35 supported biopsy. AS was mainly considered appropriate if LE < 10 years, T1c PCa, ≤20% positive cores and PSA < 3 ng/mL. A PCA3 Score <20 pleads for and higher scores (particularly >50) against AS. CONCLUSIONS: These findings illustrate in which men PCA3 can be of additional value when taking biopsy and treatment decisions in clinical practice.
PURPOSE: The Prostate CAncer gene 3 (PCA3) assay may guide prostate biopsy decisions and predict prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness. This study explored the appropriateness of (1) PCA3 testing; (2) biopsy; (3) active surveillance (AS) and the value of the PCA3 Score for biopsy and AS decisions. METHODS: Using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method, 12 urologists assessed the appropriateness of PCA3, biopsy and AS for theoretical patient profiles, constructed by combining clinical variables. They individually scored the appropriateness for all profiles using a 9-point scale. Based on the median score and extent of agreement, the appropriateness for each profile was calculated. RESULTS: The PCA3 Assay was mainly considered appropriate in men with ≥1 negative biopsy, PSA ≥ 3 ng/mL and life expectancy (LE) ≥10 years. A LE < 10 years, ≥2 negative biopsies and PCA3 Score <20 decreased biopsy appropriateness, while PSA ≥ 3 ng/mL and PCA3 Score >50 increased it. In men without a prior biopsy, LE ≥ 10 years and a suspicious DRE, PCA3 did not affect biopsy appropriateness. In other men, a PCA3 Score <20 discouraged biopsy, while a value ≥35 supported biopsy. AS was mainly considered appropriate if LE < 10 years, T1c PCa, ≤20% positive cores and PSA < 3 ng/mL. A PCA3 Score <20 pleads for and higher scores (particularly >50) against AS. CONCLUSIONS: These findings illustrate in which menPCA3 can be of additional value when taking biopsy and treatment decisions in clinical practice.
Authors: Mesut Remzi; Alexander Haese; Hein Van Poppel; Alexandre De La Taille; Arnulf Stenzl; Jörg Hennenlotter; Michael Marberger Journal: BJU Int Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Alexandre de la Taille; Jacques Irani; Markus Graefen; Felix Chun; Theo de Reijke; Paul Kil; Paolo Gontero; Alain Mottaz; Alexander Haese Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-04-15 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ina L Deras; Sheila M J Aubin; Amy Blase; John R Day; Seongjoon Koo; Alan W Partin; William J Ellis; Leonard S Marks; Yves Fradet; Harry Rittenhouse; Jack Groskopf Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ryan K Berglund; Timothy A Masterson; Kinjal C Vora; Scott E Eggener; James A Eastham; Bertrand D Guillonneau Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-09-17 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ian M Thompson; Donna K Pauler; Phyllis J Goodman; Catherine M Tangen; M Scott Lucia; Howard L Parnes; Lori M Minasian; Leslie G Ford; Scott M Lippman; E David Crawford; John J Crowley; Charles A Coltman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-05-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: John T Wei; Ziding Feng; Alan W Partin; Elissa Brown; Ian Thompson; Lori Sokoll; Daniel W Chan; Yair Lotan; Adam S Kibel; J Erik Busby; Mohamed Bidair; Daniel W Lin; Samir S Taneja; Rosalia Viterbo; Aron Y Joon; Jackie Dahlgren; Jacob Kagan; Sudhir Srivastava; Martin G Sanda Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-11-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Benjamin Kim; Zachary S Predmore; Soeren Mattke; Kristin van Busum; Courtney A Gidengil Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2015-02-06