Screening for prostate cancer at low PSA range:: The impact of digital rectal examination on tumor incidence and tumor characteristics

被引:36
|
作者
Gosselaar, Claartje
Roobol, Monique J.
Roemeling, Stijn
van der Kwast, Theo H.
Schroder, Fritz H.
机构
[1] Erasmus Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Urol, NL-3000 CA Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Mt Sinai Hosp, Dept Pathol & Lab Med, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5, Canada
来源
PROSTATE | 2007年 / 67卷 / 02期
关键词
digital rectal examination; low prostate-specific antigen; prostate cancer; screening;
D O I
10.1002/pros.20501
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVES. To compare tumor characteristics of screen-detected prostate cancers (PCs) either by digital rectal examination (DRE) or by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as biopsy indication at low PSA. METHODS. Two populations with PSA between 2.0 and 3.9 ng/ml were studied. Group-1 was biopsied if DRE was suspicious (1st screening round, N = 1877). In group-2 all men were offered biopsy, regardless of DRE result (side-study in 2nd screening-round, N 8101). We compared cancer detection rates (CDRs) and tumor characteristics. RESULTS. In group-1 abnormal DRE prompted biopsy in 253 (13.5%) men (236 (93.3%) actually biopsied). Forty-nine PCs were detected, CDR 49/1877 = 2.6%. In group-2 we found 120 cancers in 666 (83.1%) men actually biopsied, CDR = 120/801 = 15.0%. Of all cancers detected, organ confinement (clinical T2) was found in 77.5% (group-1) and 96.6% (group-2; of which 99 T1c). Of all PCs 46.9% in group-1 and 15.0% in group-2 had biopsy Gleason score (GS) >= 7. In the latter, 15.2% of T1cs were classified GS >= 7. Considering only PCs with organ confinement or GS >= 7 for each group, CDRs amounted to 2.0% versus 14.5% and 1.2% versus 2.3% for group-1 and group-2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS. PSA-based screening detected a considerable amount (15.2%) of potentially aggressive tumors as T1cs, but in addition large numbers of possibly insignificant cancers (T1c, GS = 6) were diagnosed. DRE seemed to detect more selectively high-grade cancers, but also missed many of these. Considering both populations and the need to detect aggressive but confined cancers, PSA as biopsy indication outperformed DRE at the price of more biopsies (13.5% vs. 100% if all would comply). (c) 2006Wiley-Liss, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:154 / 161
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Tumor characteristics in screening for prostate cancer with and without rectal examination as an initial screening test at low PSA (0.0-3.9 ng/ml)
    Vis, AN
    Hoedemaeker, RF
    Roobol, M
    van der Kwast, TH
    Schröder, FH
    [J]. PROSTATE, 2001, 47 (04): : 252 - 261
  • [2] Digital rectal examination as a prostate cancer-screening method in a country with a low incidence of prostate cancer
    Shim, H. B.
    Lee, S. E.
    Park, H. K.
    Ku, J. H.
    [J]. PROSTATE CANCER AND PROSTATIC DISEASES, 2007, 10 (03) : 250 - 255
  • [3] Digital rectal examination as a prostate cancer-screening method in a country with a low incidence of prostate cancer
    H B Shim
    S E Lee
    H K Park
    J H Ku
    [J]. Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases, 2007, 10 : 250 - 255
  • [4] DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION SCREENING FOR PROSTATE-CANCER
    GREEN, L
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1993, 270 (11): : 1315 - 1315
  • [5] PSA tumor marker for prostate cancer screening in Armenia
    Muradyan, A
    Avagyan, H
    Karabashyan, L
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2002, : 358 - 358
  • [6] UTILITY OF DIGITAL RECTAL EXAM FOR PROSTATE CANCER SCREENING AMONG MEN WITH LOW PSA VALUES
    Brownfield, Callan
    Harik, Lara
    Kowalczyk, Keith
    Patil, Dattatraya
    Sanda, Martin
    Osunkoya, Adeboye
    Filson, Christopher
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2021, 206 : E471 - E471
  • [7] Evaluation of the digital rectal examination as a screening test for prostate cancer
    Schroder, FH
    van der Maas, P
    Beemsterboer, P
    Kruger, AB
    Hoedemaeker, R
    Rietbergen, J
    Kranse, R
    [J]. JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 1998, 90 (23) : 1817 - 1823
  • [8] Digital Rectal Examination Is Not a Useful Screening Test for Prostate Cancer
    Krilaviciute, Agne
    Becker, Nikolaus
    Lakes, Jale
    Radtke, Jan Philipp
    Kuczyk, Markus
    Peters, Inga
    Harke, Nina N.
    Koerber, Stefan A.
    Herkommer, Kathleen
    Gschwend, Jurgen E.
    Meissner, Valentin H.
    Benner, Axel
    Seibold, Petra
    Kristiansen, Glen
    Hadaschik, Boris
    Arsov, Christian
    Schimmoeller, Lars
    Giesel, Frederik Lars
    Antoch, Gerald
    Makowski, Marcus
    Wacker, Frank
    Schlemmer, Heinz-Peter
    Kaaks, Rudolf
    Albers, Peter
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2023, 6 (06): : 566 - 573
  • [9] Underutilization of digital rectal examination when screening for prostate cancer
    Murthy, GD
    Byron, DP
    Pasquale, D
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2004, 164 (03) : 313 - 316
  • [10] Radiotherapy of prostate cancer:impact of treatment characteristics on the incidence of second tumor
    Cammelli, S.
    Ntreta, M.
    Scirocco, E.
    Macchia, G.
    Deodato, F.
    Bisello, S.
    Siepe, G.
    Alitto, A. R.
    Cilla, S.
    Valentini, V.
    Morganti, A. G.
    Buwenge, M.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2020, 152 : S359 - S359