Ying Shi1, Kathy Z Fung2, Stephen J Freedland3, Richard M Hoffman4, Victoria L Tang2, Louise C Walter2. 1. Division of Geriatrics, San Francisco VA Medical Center and University of California, San Francisco, CA. Electronic address: Ying.Shi2@va.gov. 2. Division of Geriatrics, San Francisco VA Medical Center and University of California, San Francisco, CA. 3. Durham VA Medical Center and Duke Prostate Center, Duke University, Durham, NC. 4. New Mexico VA Health Care System and Department of Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate how statin use is associated with the probability of having an abnormal screening prostate-specific antigen (PSA) result according to common PSA thresholds for biopsy (>2.5, >4.0, and >6.5 ng/mL). METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 323,426 men aged ≥65 years who had a screening PSA test in 2003 at a Veterans Affairs facility. The primary predictor was the use of statin medications at the time of index screening PSA test. The main outcome was the screening PSA value. Poisson regressions were performed to calculate adjusted relative risks for having an abnormal screening PSA result according to statin usage. RESULTS: Percentages of men with PSA results exceeding commonly used thresholds of >2.5, >4.0, and >6.5 ng/mL were 21.0%, 7.6%, and 1.6%, respectively. These percentages decreased with statin use, increasing statin dose, duration of statin use, and potency of the statin. For example, after adjusting for age, the percentage of men having a PSA level >4.0 ng/mL ranged from 8.2% in non-statin users to 6.2% in men prescribed with >40 mg of simvastatin dose. Adjusted relative risks of having a PSA level >4.0 ng/mL were 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-0.93), 0.87 (95% CI, 0.84-0.91), and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.80-0.87), respectively for men on simvastatin dose of 5-20, >20-40, and >40 mg vs non-statin users. CONCLUSION: Statin use is associated with a reduction in the probability that an older man will have an abnormal screening PSA result, regardless of the PSA threshold. This reduction is more pronounced with higher statin dose, longer statin duration, and higher statin potency.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate how statin use is associated with the probability of having an abnormal screening prostate-specific antigen (PSA) result according to common PSA thresholds for biopsy (>2.5, >4.0, and >6.5 ng/mL). METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 323,426 men aged ≥65 years who had a screening PSA test in 2003 at a Veterans Affairs facility. The primary predictor was the use of statin medications at the time of index screening PSA test. The main outcome was the screening PSA value. Poisson regressions were performed to calculate adjusted relative risks for having an abnormal screening PSA result according to statin usage. RESULTS: Percentages of men with PSA results exceeding commonly used thresholds of >2.5, >4.0, and >6.5 ng/mL were 21.0%, 7.6%, and 1.6%, respectively. These percentages decreased with statin use, increasing statin dose, duration of statin use, and potency of the statin. For example, after adjusting for age, the percentage of men having a PSA level >4.0 ng/mL ranged from 8.2% in non-statin users to 6.2% in men prescribed with >40 mg of simvastatin dose. Adjusted relative risks of having a PSA level >4.0 ng/mL were 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-0.93), 0.87 (95% CI, 0.84-0.91), and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.80-0.87), respectively for men on simvastatin dose of 5-20, >20-40, and >40 mg vs non-statin users. CONCLUSION: Statin use is associated with a reduction in the probability that an older man will have an abnormal screening PSA result, regardless of the PSA threshold. This reduction is more pronounced with higher statin dose, longer statin duration, and higher statin potency.
Authors: Sawsan Youssef; Olaf Stüve; Juan C Patarroyo; Pedro J Ruiz; Jennifer L Radosevich; Eun Mi Hur; Manuel Bravo; Dennis J Mitchell; Raymond A Sobel; Lawrence Steinman; Scott S Zamvil Journal: Nature Date: 2002-11-07 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Denise M Hynes; Kristin Koelling; Kevin Stroupe; Noreen Arnold; Katherine Mallin; Min-Woong Sohn; Frances M Weaver; Larry Manheim; Linda Kok Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Robert J Hamilton; Kenneth C Goldberg; Elizabeth A Platz; Stephen J Freedland Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2008-10-28 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Seyed Behzad Jazayeri; Young S Kwon; Russell McBride; Michael Leapman; Shemille Collingwood; Adele Hobbs; David B Samadi Journal: Curr Urol Date: 2017-05-30
Authors: Mahmoud A Alfaqih; Emma H Allott; Robert J Hamilton; Michael R Freeman; Stephen J Freedland Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2016-10-25 Impact factor: 14.432
Authors: Fei Chen; Peggy Wan; Lynne R Wilkens; Loïc Le Marchand; Christopher A Haiman Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2022-05-04 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Xiaonan Liu; Jing Li; Teresa Wu; Steven E Schild; Michael H Schild; William Wong; Sujay Vora; Mirek Fatyga Journal: OMICS J Radiol Date: 2016-06-13