Literature DB >> 24940459

Prostate cancer detection by prostate-specific antigen-based screening in the Japanese Hiroshima area shows early stage, low-grade, and low rate of cancer-specific death compared with clinical detection.

Jun Teishima1, Satoshi Maruyama2, Hideki Mochizuki3, Kiyotaka Oka1, Kenichiro Ikeda1, Keisuke Goto1, Hirotaka Nagamatsu1, Keisuke Hieda1, Koichi Shoji1, Akio Matsubara1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: We investigate the effectiveness of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer. We compare the characteristics of 2 sets of patients: (1) those in whom prostate cancer was detected via PSA screening (the PS group) and (2) those in whom prostate cancer was detected at the outpatient office (the non-PS group).
METHODS: Between 2002 and 2010, prostate cancer was detected in 315 patients by PSA screening. Their age, initial PSA level, pathological findings in biopsy specimens, clinical stage, and prognosis were compared with those of 497 prostate cancer patients diagnosed at the outpatient office of the Department of Urology, Hiroshima University, in the same period.
RESULTS: The rates of patients with initial PSA higher than 50 ng/mL, with a Gleason score of 8 or higher, and with clinical stage D were significantly lower in the PS group than those in the non-PS group. The 5-year overall survival and cancer-specific survival in the PS group was 91.3% and 98.2%, respectively; these results were significantly better than those in the non-PS group (86.4%, p = 0.0178, and 94.9%, p = 0.0112, respectively). A Cox hazard analysis showed that PSA screening was an independent predictive factor for cancer-specific survival.
CONCLUSIONS: Although our study is limited by its retrospective nature and small size, the present data indicate that prostate cancer detected in the PS group showed earlier stage, lower grade, and better prognosis than in the non-PS group.

Entities:  

Year:  2014        PMID: 24940459      PMCID: PMC4039596          DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.1715

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J        ISSN: 1911-6470            Impact factor:   1.862


  22 in total

1.  Biochemical progression rates in the screen arm compared to the control arm of the Rotterdam Section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).

Authors:  Stijn Roemeling; Monique J Roobol; Claartje Gosselaar; Fritz H Schröder
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2006-07-01       Impact factor: 4.104

2.  Trends in prostate specific antigen testing in Ireland: lessons from a country without guidelines.

Authors:  F J Drummond; A-E Carsin; L Sharp; H Comber
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2009-06-27       Impact factor: 1.568

3.  Screening for prostate cancer decreases the risk of developing metastatic disease: findings from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).

Authors:  Fritz H Schröder; Jonas Hugosson; Sigrid Carlsson; Teuvo Tammela; Liisa Määttänen; Anssi Auvinen; Maciej Kwiatkowski; Franz Recker; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2012-06-07       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Prediction of prostate cancer risk: the role of prostate volume and digital rectal examination in the ERSPC risk calculators.

Authors:  Monique J Roobol; Heidi A van Vugt; Stacy Loeb; Xiaoye Zhu; Meelan Bul; Chris H Bangma; Arno G L J H van Leenders; Ewout W Steyerberg; Fritz H Schröder
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2011-11-15       Impact factor: 20.096

5.  Prostate cancer mortality reduction by prostate-specific antigen-based screening adjusted for nonattendance and contamination in the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).

Authors:  Monique J Roobol; Melissa Kerkhof; Fritz H Schröder; Jack Cuzick; Peter Sasieni; Matti Hakama; Ulf Hakan Stenman; Stefano Ciatto; Vera Nelen; Maciej Kwiatkowski; Marcos Lujan; Hans Lilja; Marco Zappa; Louis Denis; Franz Recker; Antonio Berenguer; Mirja Ruutu; Paula Kujala; Chris H Bangma; Gunnar Aus; Teuvo L J Tammela; Arnauld Villers; Xavier Rebillard; Sue M Moss; Harry J de Koning; Jonas Hugosson; Anssi Auvinen
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2009-07-28       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  Complication rates and risk factors of 5802 transrectal ultrasound-guided sextant biopsies of the prostate within a population-based screening program.

Authors:  René Raaijmakers; Wim J Kirkels; Monique J Roobol; Mark F Wildhagen; Fritz H Schrder
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  Usefulness of age-specific reference range of prostate-specific antigen for Japanese men older than 60 years in mass screening for prostate cancer.

Authors:  K Ito; T Yamamoto; Y Kubota; K Suzuki; Y Fukabori; K Kurokawa; H Yamanaka
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2000-08-01       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Towards an optimal interval for prostate cancer screening.

Authors:  Pim J van Leeuwen; Monique J Roobol; Ries Kranse; Marco Zappa; Sigrid Carlsson; Meelan Bul; Xiaoye Zhu; Chris H Bangma; Fritz H Schröder; Jonas Hugosson
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2011-08-10       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  Screening men for prostate and colorectal cancer in the United States: does practice reflect the evidence?

Authors:  Brenda E Sirovich; Lisa M Schwartz; Steven Woloshin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-03-19       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Prostate cancer survivors who would be eligible for active surveillance but were either treated with radiotherapy or managed expectantly: comparisons on long-term quality of life and symptom burden.

Authors:  Melissa S Y Thong; Floortje Mols; Paul J M Kil; Ida J Korfage; Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2009-08-28       Impact factor: 5.588

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.