Literature DB >> 21843976

Comparison of clinical and pathologic findings of prostate cancers detected through screening versus conventional referral in Brazil.

Eliney F Faria1, Gustavo F Carvalhal, René A Vieira, Thiago B Silva, Edmundo C Mauad, Marcos Tobias-Machado, André L Carvalho.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Data regarding prostate cancer screening in Brazil are limited. We compared features of prostate cancers detected through screening versus those referred for treatment in Brazil. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Group I included 500 of 13,754 men whose cancers were detected through screening, and Group II included 2731 men referred for treatment through the habitual public health system. We used Mann-Whitney and χ(2) tests to compare clinical and pathologic findings, considering significant any P < 0.05.
RESULTS: Median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was lower among screened patients (5.5 ng/mL versus 10.0 ng/mL; P < 0.001). Of the screened patients, 170 (34%) had biopsy Gleason score ≥ 7, compared with 1265 (46.3%) in the referred group (P < 0.001). Lymph node metastases were suspected in 8.6% of the referred versus 3.2% of the screened men (P = 0.002). Distant metastases were more common in the referred men (9.3% vs. 3.0%; P < 0.001). Only 6.0% of the screened cancers were locally advanced at diagnosis (T3 or T4) versus 26.5% of the referred (P < 0.001). Screened patients had a higher proportion of localized tumors after surgery (67.7% vs. 54.2%; P = 0.002). Pathology Gleason scores were also lower among screened men (P < 0.01). Lymphadenectomies were performed in 166/636 men (26.1%). No nodal metastases were found in screened cancers (0/28; 0.0%), while 6/138 referred cancers (4.3%) presented nodal involvement (P = 0.3).
CONCLUSION: Clinical and pathologic characteristics of screen-detected cancers are more favorable than those of tumors diagnosed through the Brazilian health system.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21843976     DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2011.06.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Genitourin Cancer        ISSN: 1558-7673            Impact factor:   2.872


  6 in total

1.  Time between diagnosis and surgical treatment on pathological and clinical outcomes in prostate cancer: does it matter?

Authors:  Mariana Andozia Morini; Roberto Lodeiro Muller; Paulo César Barbosa de Castro Junior; Rafael José de Souza; Eliney Ferreira Faria
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-03-16       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Use of screening tests, diagnosis wait times, and wait-related satisfaction in breast and prostate cancer.

Authors:  M Mathews; D Ryan; V Gadag; R West
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.677

3.  Prostate cancer screening among elderly men in Brazil: should we diagnose or not?

Authors:  Rafael Ribeiro Mori; Eliney Ferreira Faria; Edmundo Carvalho Mauad; Antonio Antunes Rodrigues; Rodolfo Borges Dos Reis
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2020 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

4.  The Hospital de Câncer de Barretos Registry: an analysis of cancer survival at a single institution in Brazil over a 10-year period.

Authors:  Estela Cristina Carneseca; Edmundo Carvalho Mauad; Marcos Aurélio Alves de Araujo; Rafael Macrina Dalbó; Adhemar Longatto Filho; Vinicius de Lima Vazquez
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2013-04-10

Review 5.  Prostate cancer in Brazil and Latin America: epidemiology and screening.

Authors:  Rafael Rocha Tourinho-Barbosa; Antonio Carlos Lima Pompeo; Sidney Glina
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2016 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.541

6.  Prostate cancer awareness in the city of São Paulo.

Authors:  Feres Camargo Maluf; Felipe Marsiglia Faustino Saporito; Reinolds Amiraldo Corrêa Júnior; Pedro Araujo Conesa; Cristiano Linck Pazeto; Leonardo Seligra Lopes; Sidney Glina
Journal:  Einstein (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2021-12-03
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.