J J Tosoian1, R Alam1, C Gergis2, A Narang2, N Radwan2, S Robertson2, T McNutt2, A E Ross1, D Y Song1,2, T L DeWeese1,2, P T Tran1,2, P C Walsh1. 1. The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the relationship between PSA testing history and high-risk disease among older men diagnosed with prostate cancer. METHODS: Records from 1993 to 2014 were reviewed for men who underwent radiotherapy for prostate cancer at age 75 years or older. Patients were classified into one of four groups based on PSA-testing history: (1) no PSA testing; (2) incomplete/ineffective PSA testing; (3) PSA testing; or (4) cannot be determined. Outcomes of interest were National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group (that is, low, intermediate or high risk) and biopsy grade at diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the association between PSA testing history and high-risk cancer. RESULTS: PSA-testing history was available in 274 (94.5%) of 290 subjects meeting study criteria. In total, 148 men (54.0%) underwent PSA testing with follow-up biopsy, 72 (26.3%) underwent PSA testing without appropriate follow-up, and 54 men (19.7%) did not undergo PSA testing. Patients who underwent PSA testing were significantly less likely to be diagnosed with NCCN high-risk cancer (23.0% vs 51.6%, P<0.001). On multivariable analysis, men with no/incomplete PSA testing had more than three-fold increased odds of high-risk disease at diagnosis (odds ratio 3.39, 95% confidence interval 1.96-5.87, P<0.001) as compared to the tested population. CONCLUSIONS: Older men who underwent no PSA testing or incomplete testing were significantly more likely to be diagnosed with high-risk prostate cancer than those who were previously screened. It is reasonable to consider screening in healthy older men likely to benefit from early detection and treatment.
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the relationship between PSA testing history and high-risk disease among older men diagnosed with prostate cancer. METHODS: Records from 1993 to 2014 were reviewed for men who underwent radiotherapy for prostate cancer at age 75 years or older. Patients were classified into one of four groups based on PSA-testing history: (1) no PSA testing; (2) incomplete/ineffective PSA testing; (3) PSA testing; or (4) cannot be determined. Outcomes of interest were National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group (that is, low, intermediate or high risk) and biopsy grade at diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the association between PSA testing history and high-risk cancer. RESULTS:PSA-testing history was available in 274 (94.5%) of 290 subjects meeting study criteria. In total, 148 men (54.0%) underwent PSA testing with follow-up biopsy, 72 (26.3%) underwent PSA testing without appropriate follow-up, and 54 men (19.7%) did not undergo PSA testing. Patients who underwent PSA testing were significantly less likely to be diagnosed with NCCN high-risk cancer (23.0% vs 51.6%, P<0.001). On multivariable analysis, men with no/incomplete PSA testing had more than three-fold increased odds of high-risk disease at diagnosis (odds ratio 3.39, 95% confidence interval 1.96-5.87, P<0.001) as compared to the tested population. CONCLUSIONS: Older men who underwent no PSA testing or incomplete testing were significantly more likely to be diagnosed with high-risk prostate cancer than those who were previously screened. It is reasonable to consider screening in healthy older men likely to benefit from early detection and treatment.
Authors: George Rodrigues; Himu Lukka; Padraig Warde; Michael Brundage; Luis Souhami; Juanita Crook; Fabio Cury; Charles Catton; Gary Mok; Andre-Guy Martin; Eric Vigneault; Jim Morris; Andrew Warner; Sandra Gonzalez Maldonado; Tom Pickles Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: M Minhaj Siddiqui; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Baris Turkbey; Arvin K George; Jason Rothwax; Nabeel Shakir; Chinonyerem Okoro; Dima Raskolnikov; Howard L Parnes; W Marston Linehan; Maria J Merino; Richard M Simon; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: JAMA Date: 2015-01-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Justin E Bekelman; Nandita Mitra; Elizabeth A Handorf; Robert G Uzzo; Stephen A Hahn; Daniel Polsky; Katrina Armstrong Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-01-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jonathan I Epstein; Lars Egevad; Mahul B Amin; Brett Delahunt; John R Srigley; Peter A Humphrey Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Lee Richstone; Fernando J Bianco; Hiral H Shah; Michael W Kattan; James A Eastham; Peter T Scardino; Douglas S Scherr Journal: BJU Int Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 5.588