Sabin Smith1, Philippe Wolanski1. 1. Department of Urology, Townsville Hospital, Douglas, Queensland, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare the incidence of newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer at an Australian facility pre- and post-publication of the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines and subsequent amendment of the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners Preventive Activities in General Practice guidelines. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was undertaken by patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer following transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy between 2009 and 2014. Patients were divided into two even groups based on whether they had undergone their transrectal ultrasound biopsy pre- (2009-2011) or post- (2013-2014) publication of USPSTF guidelines. Metastatic disease was determined by computed tomography chest, abdomen, pelvis as well as nuclear medicine bone scan. A comparison in the incidence of newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer was made. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were allocated into each group. In the pre-USPSTF group, 23 out of 130 patients had newly diagnosed metastatic prostatic cancer (17.7%). In the post-USPSTF group, 41 out of 130 (31.5%) had newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer (P < 0.05). The mean and median prostate-specific antigen was 15.9 and 9.4 (pre-guideline group) and 33.0 and 9.8 (post-guideline group), respectively (P = 0.02). The post-guidelines group had a higher incidence of low-grade disease (Gleason <7), a decreased incidence of intermediate grade disease (Gleason 7) and a relatively unchanged incidence in high-risk disease (Gleason >7). CONCLUSION: The incidence of newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer nearly doubled in patients referred to our Urology Department post-release of the USPSTF guidelines.
BACKGROUND: To compare the incidence of newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer at an Australian facility pre- and post-publication of the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines and subsequent amendment of the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners Preventive Activities in General Practice guidelines. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was undertaken by patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer following transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy between 2009 and 2014. Patients were divided into two even groups based on whether they had undergone their transrectal ultrasound biopsy pre- (2009-2011) or post- (2013-2014) publication of USPSTF guidelines. Metastatic disease was determined by computed tomography chest, abdomen, pelvis as well as nuclear medicine bone scan. A comparison in the incidence of newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer was made. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were allocated into each group. In the pre-USPSTF group, 23 out of 130 patients had newly diagnosed metastatic prostatic cancer (17.7%). In the post-USPSTF group, 41 out of 130 (31.5%) had newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer (P < 0.05). The mean and median prostate-specific antigen was 15.9 and 9.4 (pre-guideline group) and 33.0 and 9.8 (post-guideline group), respectively (P = 0.02). The post-guidelines group had a higher incidence of low-grade disease (Gleason <7), a decreased incidence of intermediate grade disease (Gleason 7) and a relatively unchanged incidence in high-risk disease (Gleason >7). CONCLUSION: The incidence of newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer nearly doubled in patients referred to our Urology Department post-release of the USPSTF guidelines.