Literature DB >> 23228289

The digital rectal examination (DRE) remains important - outcomes from a contemporary cohort of men undergoing an initial 12-18 core prostate needle biopsy.

Ricardo Palmerola1, Paul Smith, Vanessa Elliot, Carl T Reese, Frank B Mahon, Lewis E Harpster, Nikolina Icitovic, Jay D Raman.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Indications for prostate needle biopsy (PNB) include elevated serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and/or abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE). We evaluated a contemporary cohort of men undergoing PNB to determine cancer detection rates when stratified by DRE status.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The charts of 806 men who underwent a PNB were reviewed. Serum PSA was categorized as normal or abnormal according to age-specific criteria. A normal DRE was defined as a smooth, age-appropriate, asymmetric, or uniformly enlarged prostate. An abnormal DRE was defined by either a nodule or induration. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were determined for an abnormal DRE and the diagnosis of prostate cancer.
RESULTS: Within the cohort, 516 patients (64%) had a normal and 290 (36%) an abnormal DRE. Three hundred six (38%) men were diagnosed with prostate cancer of which 136 (44%) had an abnormal DRE. Fourteen percent of patients with prostate cancer had an isolated DRE abnormality. Furthermore, when specifically considering these 136 men with an abnormal DRE and prostate cancer, 43 (31%) had a normal age-specific PSA value. No differences in cancer detection rate were noted when stratifying by type of DRE abnormality. In this select cohort of patients undergoing prostate biopsy, an abnormal DRE had a sensitivity of 44%, specificity of 68%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 46%, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 67% for detecting prostate cancer on biopsy.
CONCLUSION: Almost 50% of men in our cohort diagnosed with prostate cancer had an abnormal DRE. While only 14% of all patients with prostate cancer had an isolated DRE abnormality, 31% of these men had normal age-specific PSA values. Such observations underscore the importance of the DRE for prostate cancer screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23228289

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Urol        ISSN: 1195-9479            Impact factor:   1.344


  6 in total

1.  An Automated Feature Engineering for Digital Rectal Examination Documentation using Natural Language Processing.

Authors:  Selen Bozkurt; Jung In Park; Kathleen Mary Kan; Michelle Ferrari; Daniel L Rubin; James D Brooks; Tina Hernandez-Boussard
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2018-12-05

2.  A Novel Combination of Serum Markers in a Multivariate Model to Help Triage Patients Into "Low-" and "High-Risk" Categories for Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Christopher J McNally; Joanne Watt; Mary Jo Kurth; John V Lamont; Tara Moore; Peter Fitzgerald; Hardev Pandha; Declan J McKenna; Mark W Ruddock
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 5.738

3.  Does an asymmetric lobe in digital rectal examination include any risk for prostate cancer? results of 1495 biopsies.

Authors:  Ömer Yilmaz; Özgür Kurul; Ferhat Ates; Hasan Soydan; Zeki Aktas
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.541

Review 4.  Has COVID-19 Affected Cancer Screening Programs? A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ibrahim Alkatout; Matthias Biebl; Zohre Momenimovahed; Edward Giovannucci; Fatemeh Hadavandsiri; Hamid Salehiniya; Leila Allahqoli
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-05-17       Impact factor: 6.244

5.  Serum total prostate-specific antigen values in men with symptomatic prostate enlargement in Nigeria: role in clinical decision-making.

Authors:  Ikenna I Nnabugwu; Fred O Ugwumba; Oghenekaro A Enivwenae; Emeka I Udeh; Chris O Otene; Chinwe A Nnabugwu
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2014-12-30       Impact factor: 4.458

6.  Is it possible to automatically assess pretreatment digital rectal examination documentation using natural language processing? A single-centre retrospective study.

Authors:  Selen Bozkurt; Kathleen M Kan; Michelle K Ferrari; Daniel L Rubin; Douglas W Blayney; Tina Hernandez-Boussard; James D Brooks
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-07-18       Impact factor: 2.692

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.