Prostate-Specific Antigen, Digital Rectal Examination and Transrectal Ultrasonography: A Meta-Analysis for This Diagnostic Triad of Prostate Cancer in Symptomatic Korean Men

We conducted a meta-analysis using results from the Korean literature to determine whether prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or digital rectal examination (DRE) or transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) provides a better diagnostic outcome for possible prostate cancer patients. An extensive literature search of MedRIC database et al. (1980 to 2003) was performed using the medical subject headings "PSA", "DRE", "TRUS" and "prostate cancer". Of the 108 articles that we retrieved, 13 studies (2,029 subjects) were selected for this meta-analysis. The criteria for quality evaluation were as follows: the study subjects must have been compared clinically for suspected prostate cancer, and the articles must have included individual data about sensitivity and specificity for this diagnostic triad based on the biopsy results as a reference standard. For the quantitative meta-analysis process the Hasselblad method was utilized. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for a PSA level greater than 4 ng/mL were 91.3% and 35.9%, respectively; and those for a PSA level greater than 10 ng/mL were 77.3% and 67.5%, respectively; and those for DRE were 68.4% and 71.5%, respectively; and those for TRUS were 73.6% and 61.3%, respectively. According to the results in a fixed effect model for PSA criteria, the estimates of d for PSA4 and PSA10 were 0.8517 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.6694, 1.0340] and 1.0996 (95% CI: 0.9459, 1.2534), respectively. Also, according to the results using a random effect model for both DRE and TRUS criteria, the estimates of d for DRE and TRUS were 0.8398 (95% CI: 0.7169, 0.9627) and 0.8002 (95% CI: 0.6714, 0.9289), respectively. The detection rate for combination testing of PSA, DRE and TRUS for the diagnosis of prostate cancer jumped further to 68.3% or to 76.8%. In conclusion, this study suggests that this diagnostic triad for prostate cancer was noneffective when they were used separately. Therefore, we recommend that the urologists should use PSA together with DRE and TRUS for the primary diagnosis of prostate cancer in men with lower urological symptoms

Discussing life expectancy with surgical patients: Do patients want to know and how should this information be delivered?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Predicted patient life expectancy (LE) and survival probability (SP), based on a patient's medical history, are important components of surgical decision-making and informed consent. The objective of this study was to assess patients' interpretation of and desire to know information relating to LE, in addition to establishing the most effective format for discussion.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A cross sectional survey of 120 patients (mean age = 68.7 years, range 50–90 years), recruited from general urological and surgical outpatient clinics in one District General and one Teaching hospital in Southwest England (UK) was conducted. Patients were included irrespective of their current diagnosis or associated comorbidity. Hypothetical patient case scenarios were used to assess patients' desire to know LE and SP, in addition to their preferred presentation format.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>58% of patients expressed a desire to know their LE and SP, if it were possible to calculate, with 36% not wishing to know either. Patients preferred a combination of numerical and pictorial formats in discussing LE and SP, with numerical, verbal and pictorial formats alone least preferred. 71% patients ranked the survival curve as either their first or second most preferred graph, with 76% rating facial figures their least preferred. No statistically significant difference was noted between sexes or educational backgrounds.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>A proportion of patients seem unwilling to discuss their LE and SP. This may relate to their current diagnosis, level of associated comorbidity or degree of understanding. However it is feasible that by providing this information in a range of presentation formats, greater engagement in the shared decision-making process can be encouraged.</p

Prostate-specific antigen testing accuracy in community practice

BACKGROUND: Most data on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing come from urologic cohorts comprised of volunteers for screening programs. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of PSA testing for detecting prostate cancer in community practice. METHODS: PSA testing results were compared with a reference standard of prostate biopsy. Subjects were 2,620 men 40 years and older undergoing (PSA) testing and biopsy from 1/1/95 through 12/31/98 in the Albuquerque, New Mexico metropolitan area. Diagnostic measures included the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios. RESULTS: Cancer was detected in 930 subjects (35%). The area under the ROC curve was 0.67 and the PSA cutpoint of 4 ng/ml had a sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 33%. The likelihood ratio for a positive test (LR+) was 1.28 and 0.42 for a negative test (LR-). PSA testing was most sensitive (90%) but least specific (27%) in older men. Age-specific reference ranges improved specificity in older men (49%) but decreased sensitivity (70%), with an LR+ of 1.38. Lowering the PSA cutpoint to 2 ng/ml resulted in a sensitivity of 95%, a specificity of 20%, and an LR+ of 1.19. CONCLUSIONS: PSA testing had fair discriminating power for detecting prostate cancer in community practice. The PSA cutpoint of 4 ng/ml was sensitive but relatively non-specific and associated likelihood ratios only moderately revised probabilities for cancer. Using age-specific reference ranges and a PSA cutpoint below 4 ng/ml improved test specificity and sensitivity, respectively, but did not improve the overall accuracy of PSA testing

Follow-up care for men with prostate cancer and the role of primary care: a systematic review of international guidelines

The optimal role for primary care in providing follow-up for men with prostate cancer is uncertain. A systematic review of international guidelines was undertaken to help identify key elements of existing models of follow-up care to establish a theoretical basis for evaluating future complex interventions. Many guidelines provide insufficient information to judge the reliability of the recommendations. Although the PSA test remains the cornerstone of follow-up, the diversity of recommendations on the provision of follow-up care reflects the current lack of research evidence on which to base firm conclusions. The review highlights the importance of transparent guideline development procedures and the need for robust primary research to inform future evidence-based models of follow-up care for men with prostate cancer

Understanding preventive behaviors among mid-Western African-American men: a pilot qualitative study of prostate screening

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jomh.2011.03.00

The development of a web- and a print-based decision aid for prostate cancer screening

Background Whether early detection and treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) will reduce disease-related mortality remains uncertain. As a result, tools are needed to facilitate informed decision making. While there have been several decision aids (DAs) developed and tested, very few have included an exercise to help men clarify their values and preferences about PCa screening. Further, only one DA has utilized an interactive web-based format, which allows for an expansion and customization of the material. We describe the development of two DAs, a booklet and an interactive website, each with a values clarification component and designed for use in diverse settings. Methods We conducted two feasibility studies to assess men\u27s (45-70 years) Internet access and their willingness to use a web- vs. a print-based tool. The booklet was adapted from two previous versions evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the website was created to closely match the content of the revised booklet. Usability testing was conducted to obtain feedback regarding draft versions of the materials. The tools were also reviewed by a plain language expert and the interdisciplinary research team. Feedback on the content and presentation led to iterative modifications of the tools. Results The feasibility studies confirmed that the Internet was a viable medium, as the majority of men used a computer, had access to the Internet, and Internet use increased over time. Feedback from the usability testing on the length, presentation, and content of the materials was incorporated into the final versions of the booklet and website. Both the feasibility studies and the usability testing highlighted the need to address men\u27s informed decision making regarding screening. Conclusions Informed decision making for PCa screening is crucial at present and may be important for some time, particularly if a definitive recommendation either for or against screening does not emerge from ongoing prostate cancer screening trials. We have detailed our efforts at developing print- and web-based DAs to assist men in determining how to best meet their PCa screening preferences. Following completion of our ongoing RCT designed to test these materials, our goal will be to develop a dissemination project for the more effective tool

Applying strategies from libertarian paternalism to decision making for prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite the recent publication of results from two randomized clinical trials, prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer remains a controversial issue. There is lack of agreement across studies that PSA screening significantly reduces prostate cancer mortality. In spite of these facts, the widespread use of PSA testing in the United States leads to overdetection and overtreatment of clinically indolent prostate cancer, and its associated harms of incontinence and impotence.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Given the inconclusive results from clinical trials and incongruent PSA screening guidelines, the decision to screen for prostate cancer with PSA testing is an uncertain one for patients and health care providers. Screening guidelines from some health organizations recommend an informed decision making (IDM) or shared decision making (SDM) approach for deciding on PSA screening. These approaches aim to empower patients to choose among the available options by making them active participants in the decision making process. By increasing involvement of patients in the clinical decision-making process, IDM/SDM places more of the responsibility for a complex decision on the patient. Research suggests, however, that patients are not well-informed of the harms and benefits associated with prostate cancer screening and are also subject to an assortment of biases, emotion, fears, and irrational thought that interferes with making an informed decision. In response, the IDM/SDM approaches can be augmented with strategies from the philosophy of libertarian paternalism (LP) to improve decision making. LP uses the insights of behavioural economics to help people better make better choices. Some of the main strategies of LP applicable to PSA decision making are a default decision rule, framing of decision aids, and timing of the decision. In this paper, we propose that applying strategies from libertarian paternalism can help with PSA screening decision-making.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>Our proposal to augment IDM and SDM approaches with libertarian paternalism strategies is intended to guide patients toward a better decision about testing while maintaining personal freedom of choice. While PSA screening remains controversial and evidence conflicting, a libertarian-paternalism influenced approach to decision making can help prevent the overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer.</p

Preclinical evaluation of a TEX101 protein ELISA test for the differential diagnosis of male infertility

BACKGROUND: TEX101 is a cell membrane protein exclusively expressed by testicular germ cells and shed into seminal plasma. We previously verified human TEX101 as a biomarker for the differential diagnosis of azoospermia, and developed a first-of-its-kind TEX101 ELISA. To demonstrate the clinical utility of TEX101, in this work we aimed at evaluating ELISA performance in a large population of fertile, subfertile, and infertile men. METHODS: Mass spectrometry, size-exclusion chromatography, ultracentrifugation, and immunohistochemistry were used to characterize TEX101 protein as an analyte in seminal plasma. Using the optimized protocol for seminal plasma pretreatment, TEX101 was measured by ELISA in 805 seminal plasma samples. RESULTS: We demonstrated that TEX101 was present in seminal plasma mostly in a free soluble form and that its small fraction was associated with seminal microvesicles. TEX101 median values were estimated in healthy, fertile pre-vasectomy men (5436 ng/mL, N = 64) and in patients with unexplained infertility (4967 ng/mL, N = 277), oligospermia (450 ng/mL, N = 270), and azoospermia (0.5 ng/mL, N = 137). Fertile post-vasectomy men (N = 57) and patients with Sertoli cell-only syndrome (N = 13) and obstructive azoospermia (N = 36) had undetectable levels of TEX101 (≤0.5 ng/mL). A cut-off value of 0.9 ng/mL provided 100% sensitivity at 100% specificity for distinguishing pre- and post-vasectomy men. The combination of a concentration of TEX101 > 0.9 ng/mL and epididymis-specific protein ECM1 > 2.3 μg/mL provided 81% sensitivity at 100% specificity for differentiating between non-obstructive and obstructive azoospermia, thus eliminating the majority of diagnostic testicular biopsies. In addition, a cut-off value of ≥0.6 ng/mL provided 73% sensitivity at 64% specificity for predicting sperm or spermatid retrieval in patients with non-obstructive azoospermia. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the clinical utility of TEX101 ELISA as a test to evaluate vasectomy success, to stratify azoospermia forms, and to better select patients for sperm retrieval. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12916-017-0817-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users