Literature DB >> 23043563

Positive predictive value of prostate biopsy indicated by prostate-specific-antigen-based prostate cancer screening: trends over time in a European randomized trial*.

Leonard P Bokhorst1, Xiaoye Zhu, Meelan Bul, Chris H Bangma, Fritz H Schröder, Monique J Roobol.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Study Type--Diagnosis (validating cohort) Level of Evidence 1b. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? The European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) showed a reduction in prostate cancer mortality of 21% for PSA-based screening at a median follow-up of 11 years. In the ERSPC, men are screened at 4-year intervals. A prostate biopsy is recommended for men with a PSA level ≥ 3.0 ng/mL. The study shows that the positive predictive value (PPV) of a prostate biopsy indicated by PSA-based screening remains equal throughout consecutive screening rounds in men without a previous biopsy. In men who have previously had a benign biopsy, the PPV drops considerably, but 20% of the cancers detected still show aggressive characteristics.
OBJECTIVE: • To assess the positive predictive value (PPV) of prostate biopsy, indicated by a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) threshold of ≥ 3.0 ng/mL, over time, in the Rotterdam section of the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: • In the Rotterdam section of the ERSPC, a total of 42,376 participants, aged 55-74 years, identified from population registries were randomly assigned to a screening or control arm. • For the ERSPC men undergo PSA screening at 4-year intervals. A total of three screening rounds were evaluated; therefore, only men aged 55-69 years at the first screening were eligible for the present study.
RESULTS: • PPVs for men without previous biopsy remained equal throughout the three subsequent screenings (25.5, 22.3 and 24.8% respectively). • Conversely, PPVs for men with a previous negative biopsy dropped significantly (12.0 and 15.2% at the second and third screening, respectively). • Additionally, in men with and without previous biopsy, the percentage of aggressive prostate cancers (clinical stage >T2b, Gleason score ≥ 7) decreased after the first round of screening from 44.4 to 23.8% in the second (P < 0.001) and 18.6% in the third round (P < 0.001). • Repeat biopsies accounted for 24.6% of all biopsies, but yielded only 8.6% of all aggressive cancers.
CONCLUSIONS: • In consecutive screening rounds the PPV of PSA-based screening remains equal in previously unbiopsied men. • In men with a previous negative biopsy the PPV drops considerably, but 20% of cancers detected still show aggressive characteristics. • Individualized screening algorithms should incorporate previous biopsy status in the decision to perform a repeat biopsy with the aim of further reducing unnecessary biopsies.
© 2012 BJU INTERNATIONAL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23043563     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11481.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  16 in total

1.  Role of MRI for the detection of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Richard C Wu; Amir H Lebastchi; Boris A Hadaschik; Mark Emberton; Caroline Moore; Pilar Laguna; Jurgen J Fütterer; Arvin K George
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Prostate cancer: A valuable tool for prediction of repeat biopsy pathology.

Authors:  Pierre Karakiewicz; Sebastiano Nazzani
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2017-12-28       Impact factor: 14.432

3.  Managing localized prostate cancer in the era of prostate-specific antigen screening.

Authors:  James D Brooks
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Complications of initial prostate biopsy in a European randomized screening trial.

Authors:  Suzanne van den Heuvel; Stacy Loeb; Xiaoye Zhu; Paul Cms Verhagen; Fritz H Schröder; Chris H Bangma; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Am J Clin Exp Urol       Date:  2013-12-25

5.  External validation of Cormio nomogram for predicting all prostate cancers and clinically significant prostate cancers.

Authors:  Luca Cindolo; Riccardo Bertolo; Andrea Minervini; Francesco Sessa; Gianluca Muto; Pierluigi Bove; Matteo Vittori; Giorgio Bozzini; Pietro Castellan; Filippo Mugavero; Mario Falsaperla; Luigi Schips; Antonio Celia; Maida Bada; Angelo Porreca; Antonio Pastore; Yazan Al Salhi; Marco Giampaoli; Giovanni Novella; Riccardo Rizzetto; Nicoló Trabacchin; Guglielmo Mantica; Giovannalberto Pini; Riccardo Lombardo; Andrea Tubaro; Alessandro Antonelli; Cosimo De Nunzio
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-01-06       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Label-free diagnostics and cancer surgery Raman spectra guidance for the human colon at different excitation wavelengths.

Authors:  Beata Brozek-Pluska; Krystian Miazek; Jacek Musiał; Radzislaw Kordek
Journal:  RSC Adv       Date:  2019-12-06       Impact factor: 4.036

7.  A panel of DNA methylation markers reveals extensive methylation in histologically benign prostate biopsy cores from cancer patients.

Authors:  Igor Brikun; Deborah Nusskern; Daniel Gillen; Amy Lynn; Daniel Murtagh; John Feczko; William G Nelson; Diha Freije
Journal:  Biomark Res       Date:  2014-12-12

8.  An In-Depth Glycosylation Assay for Urinary Prostate-Specific Antigen.

Authors:  Guinevere S M Kammeijer; Jan Nouta; Jean J M C H de la Rosette; Theo M de Reijke; Manfred Wuhrer
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2018-03-14       Impact factor: 6.986

9.  What is an acceptable false negative rate in the detection of prostate cancer?

Authors:  Jan F M Verbeek; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-02

10.  Kallikrein-Related Peptidases in Prostate Cancer: From Molecular Function to Clinical Application.

Authors:  Ruth A Fuhrman-Luck; Daniela Loessner; Judith A Clements
Journal:  EJIFCC       Date:  2014-10-24
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.