Literature DB >> 28012755

Comparison of Digital Rectal Examination and Serum Prostate Specific Antigen in the Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: Results of a Multicenter Clinical Trial of 6,630 Men.

William J Catalona1, Jerome P Richie1, Frederick R Ahmann1, M'Liss A Hudson1, Peter T Scardino1, Robert C Flanigan1, Jean B DeKernion1, Timothy L Ratliff1, Louis R Kavoussi1, Bruce L Dalkin1, W Bedford Waters1, Michael T MacFarlane1, Paula C Southwick1.   

Abstract

To compare the efficacy of digital rectal examination and serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) in the early detection of prostate cancer, we conducted a prospective clinical trial at 6 university centers of 6,630 male volunteers 50 years old or older who underwent PSA determination (Hybritech Tandom-E or Tandem-R assays) and digital rectal examination. Quadrant biopsies were performed if the PSA level was greater than 4 μg./l. or digital rectal examination was suspicious, even if transrectal ultrasonography revealed no areas suspicious for cancer. The results showed that 15% of the men had a PSA level of greater than 4 μg./l., 15% had a suspicious digital rectal examination and 26% had suspicious findings on either or both tests. Of 1,167 biopsies performed cancer was detected in 264. PSA detected significantly more tumors (82%, 216 of 264 cancers) than digital rectal examination (55%, 146 of 264, p = 0.001). The cancer detection rate was 3.2% for digital rectal examination, 4.6% for PSA and 5.8% for the 2 methods combined. Positive predictive value was 32% for PSA and 21% for digital rectal examination. Of 160 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy and pathological staging 114 (71%) had organ confined cancer: PSA detected 85 (75%) and digital rectal examination detected 64 (56%, p = 0.003). Use of the 2 methods in combination increased detection of organ confined disease by 78% (50 of 64 cases) over digital rectal examination alone. If the performance of a biopsy would have required suspicious transrectal ultrasonography findings, nearly 40% of the tumors would have been missed. We conclude that the use of PSA in conjunction with digital rectal examination enhances early prostate cancer detection. Prostatic biopsy should be considered if either the PSA level is greater than 4 μg./l. or digital rectal examination is suspicious for cancer, even in the absence of abnormal transrectal ultrasonography findings.
Copyright © 1994 American Urological Association, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  antigens; diagnosis; neoplasm; prostatic neoplasms; ultrasonography

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28012755     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.10.073

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  16 in total

Review 1.  3D imaging for driving cancer discovery.

Authors:  Ravian L van Ineveld; Esmée J van Vliet; Ellen J Wehrens; Maria Alieva; Anne C Rios
Journal:  EMBO J       Date:  2022-04-11       Impact factor: 14.012

2.  The Value of Prostate-Specific Antigen-Related Indexes and Imaging Screening in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Xiaojing Bai; Yumei Jiang; Xinwei Zhang; Meiyu Wang; Juanhua Tian; Lijun Mu; Yuefeng Du
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 3.989

3.  Comparison of Three Assays for Total and Free PSA Using Hybritech and WHO Calibrations.

Authors:  Manuel M Garrido; José C Marta; Ruy M Ribeiro; Luís C Pinheiro; Stefan Holdenrieder; João T Guimarães
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2021 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.155

4.  Detecting Prostate Cancer Using Pattern Recognition Neural Networks With Flow Cytometry-Based Immunophenotyping in At-Risk Men.

Authors:  George A Dominguez; Alexander T Polo; John Roop; Anthony J Campisi; Robert A Somer; Adam D Perzin; Dmitry I Gabrilovich; Amit Kumar
Journal:  Biomark Insights       Date:  2020-04-17

5.  Serum Levels of Matrix Metalloproteinase-1 in Brazilian Patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia or Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  William Khalil El-Chaer; Audrey Cecília Tonet-Furioso; Gilberto Santos Morais Junior; Vinícius Carolino Souza; Gleiciane Gontijo Avelar; Adriane Dallanora Henriques; Clayton Franco Moraes; Otávio Toledo Nóbrega
Journal:  Curr Gerontol Geriatr Res       Date:  2020-05-05

6.  Developing Strategy to Predict the Results of Prostate Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Reduce Unnecessary Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scan.

Authors:  Junxiao Liu; Shuanbao Yu; Biao Dong; Guodong Hong; Jin Tao; Yafeng Fan; Zhaowei Zhu; Zhiyu Wang; Xuepei Zhang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-09-14       Impact factor: 6.244

7.  Evaluation of VEGF and PEDF in prostate cancer: A preliminary study in serum and biopsies.

Authors:  Josué Rivera-Pérez; María Del Rocío Monter-Vera; Cornelio Barrientos-Alvarado; Julia D Toscano-Garibay; Teresa Cuesta-Mejías; Javier Flores-Estrada
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2017-11-08       Impact factor: 2.967

8.  Fusion transcript detection using spatial transcriptomics.

Authors:  Stefanie Friedrich; Erik L L Sonnhammer
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 3.063

9.  Using clinical parameters to predict prostate cancer and reduce the unnecessary biopsy among patients with PSA in the gray zone.

Authors:  Junxiao Liu; Biao Dong; Wugong Qu; Jiange Wang; Yue Xu; Shuanbao Yu; Xuepei Zhang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-03-20       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Prostate Cancer Screening in Brazil: a single center experience in the public health system.

Authors:  Renato Almeida Rosa de Oliveira; Gustavo Cardoso Guimarães; Thiago Camelo Mourão; Ricardo de Lima Favaretto; Thiago Borges Marques Santana; Ademar Lopes; Stenio de Cassio Zequi
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2021 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.541

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.