Literature DB >> 7508784

Efficient pathway for early detection of prostate cancer concluded from a 5-year prospective study.

E P Allhoff1, S G Liedke, O Gonnermann, C G Stief, U Jonas, B Schneider.   

Abstract

In a prospective study the statistical characteristics of digital rectal examination (DRE), transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), and serologic determination of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) were assessed in 1230 patients aged over 40 years. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were determined to be 80.3%, 69.7%, 58.9%, and 86.7%, respectively, for DRE; 76.5%, 62.3%, 52.3%, and 83.1%, respectively, for TRUS; and 87.9%, 49.6%, 48.5%, and 88.3%, respectively, for PSA (normal level, 4 ng/ml). The data clearly demonstrate the nonsuitability of each single measure for reliable early detection of prostatic carcinoma. Connection of the parameters in all possible combinations under various conditions demonstrated the superiority of the test "DRE and PSA > 4 ng/ml" over DRE as the "gold standard" and all other options. The use of this approach as the first-line raster of an algorithm (outlined herein) would allow the detection of prostatic malignancy with a specificity of 86.5% and a positive predictive value of 74.0%. Supplementing this screen with short-term controls in cases in which only one parameter is positive ("DRE or PSA > 4 ng/ml") might enable the detection of almost all patients with prostate cancer. TRUS did not provide any additional information.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 7508784     DOI: 10.1007/bf00185069

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  11 in total

1.  Statistical considerations in cancer screening programs.

Authors:  P C Prorok; R J Connor; S G Baker
Journal:  Urol Clin North Am       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 2.241

Review 2.  Methods of early diagnosis in genitourinary cancer.

Authors:  P Guinan; M Rubenstein
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1987-08-01       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Prostatic evaluation by transrectal endosonography: detection of carcinoma.

Authors:  M D Rifkin; G W Friedland; L Shortliffe
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Radical surgery versus radiotherapy for adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

Authors:  D F Paulson; G H Lin; W Hinshaw; S Stephani
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1982-09       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  The benign killer: carcinoma of the prostate.

Authors:  D J Krauss; O M Lilien
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1975-06       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Prostate cancer: comparison of digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasound for screening.

Authors:  M Palken; O E Cobb; C E Simons; B H Warren; H C Aldape
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Trends in patterns of care for prostatic cancer, 1974-1983: results of surveys by the American College of Surgeons.

Authors:  J D Schmidt; C J Mettlin; N Natarajan; B B Peace; R W Beart; D P Winchester; G P Murphy
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1986-08       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Prostatic evaluation by transrectal sonography with histopathologic correlation: the echopenic appearance of early carcinoma.

Authors:  W F Dähnert; U M Hamper; J C Eggleston; P C Walsh; R C Sanders
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Comparison of digital examination and transrectal ultrasonography for the diagnosis of prostatic cancer.

Authors:  G W Chodak; V Wald; E Parmer; H Watanabe; H Ohe; M Saitoh
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1986-05       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Adenocarcinoma of the prostate: results of routine urological screening.

Authors:  I M Thompson; J J Ernst; M P Gangai; C R Spence
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1984-10       Impact factor: 7.450

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.