7 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Predicting bone scan positivity in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.
BackgroundTo evaluate PSA levels and kinetic cutoffs to predict positive bone scans for men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) cohort.MethodsRetrospective analysis of 531 bone scans of 312 clinically CRPC patients with no known metastases at baseline treated with a variety of primary treatment types in the SEARCH database. The association of patients' demographics, pathological features, PSA levels and kinetics with risk of a positive scan was tested using generalized estimating equations.ResultsA total of 149 (28%) scans were positive. Positive scans were associated with younger age (odds ratio (OR)=0.98; P=0.014), higher Gleason scores (relative to Gleason 2-6, Gleason 3+4: OR=2.03, P=0.035; Gleason 4+3 and 8-10: OR=1.76, P=0.059), higher prescan PSA (OR=2.11; P<0.001), shorter prescan PSA doubling time (PSADT; OR=0.53; P<0.001), higher PSA velocity (OR=1.74; P<0.001) and more remote scan year (OR=0.92; P=0.004). Scan positivity was 6, 14, 29 and 57% for men with PSA<5, 5-14.9, 15-49.9 and ⩾ 50 ng ml(-1), respectively (P-trend <0.001). Men with PSADT ⩾ 15, 9-14.9, 3-8.9 and <3 months had a scan positivity of 11, 22, 34 and 47%, correspondingly (P-trend <0.001). Tables were constructed using PSA and PSADT to predict the likelihood of a positive bone scan.ConclusionsPSA levels and kinetics were associated with positive bone scans. We developed tables to predict the risk of positive bone scans by PSA and PSADT. Combining PSA levels and kinetics may help select patients with CRPC for bone scans
Recommended from our members
Practice patterns and predictors of followup imaging after a negative bone scan in men with castration resistant prostate cancer: Results from the SEARCH database
Purpose We investigated imaging practice patterns in men with nonmetastatic (M0) castration resistant prostate cancer. Materials and Methods We analyzed data on 247 patients with documented M0 CRPC from the SEARCH database. Patients were selected regardless of primary treatment modality and all had a negative bone scan after a castration resistant prostate cancer diagnosis. Cox models were used to test associations of time to a second imaging test with several demographic and clinical factors. Results During a median followup of 29.0 months (IQR 12.9-43.5) after a post-castration resistant prostate cancer bone scan was negative, 190 patients (77%) underwent a second imaging test. On univariable analysis patients with higher prostate specific antigen (HR 1.13, p = 0.016), shorter prostate specific antigen doubling time (HR 0.79, p <0.001) and faster prostate specific antigen velocity (HR 1.01, p <0.001) were more likely to undergo a second imaging test. Treatment center was also a significant predictor of a second imaging test (p = 0.010). No other factor was a significant predictor. Results were similar on multivariable analysis. It was estimated that approximately 20% of men with a prostate specific antigen doubling time of less than 3 months did not undergo an imaging test in the first year after a post-castration resistant prostate cancer negative bone scan. However, 50% of patients with prostate specific antigen doubling time 15 months or greater underwent a second imaging test in the first year. Conclusions Clinicians use some known predictors of positive imaging tests to determine which patients with M0 castration resistant prostate cancer undergo a second imaging test. However, there may be under imaging in those at high risk and over imaging in those at low risk. Further studies are needed to identify risk factors for metastasis and form clear imaging guidelines in patients with M0 castration resistant prostate cancer
Meta-analysis of metabolic syndrome and prostate cancer
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Metabolic syndrome (MetS) and prostate cancer (PCa) are highly prevalent conditions worldwide. Current evidence suggests the emerging hypothesis that MetS could play a role in the development and progression of several neoplasms. The aims of this study are to evaluate the impact of MetS and MetS factors on PCa incidence, on the risk of high-grade PCa and to analyze the role of MetS and single MetS components on the development of aggressive PCa features.
METHODS:
A systematic literature search and analysis on PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and Academic One File databases until September 2015 was performed by 2 independent reviewers to evaluate the associations between MetS and PCa incidence, and between MetS and high-grade PCa incidence (bioptical Gleason Score⩾8, Prognostic Group 4-5 according to the novel prostate cancer grading system). Also the association between MetS and individual MetS components with pathological Gleason Score⩾8, extra-capsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion, positive surgical margins and biochemical recurrence (defined as two consecutive PSA values ⩾0.2 ng ml-1 after radical prostatectomy) was evaluated.
RESULTS:
24 studies were selected including a total of 132 589 participants of whom 17.35% had MetS. There was a slight association between MetS and PCa incidence (odds ratio (OR)=1.17 (1.00-1.36), P=0.04) and between high-grade PCa and MetS (OR= 1.89 (1.50-2.38), P<0.0001) but the studies were statistically heterogeneous. No association was found between MetS components and PCa risk except for hypertension. MetS was significantly associated with pathologic Gleason Score⩾8 (OR= 1.77 (1.34-2.34); P<0.01), extra-capsular extension (OR=1.13 (1.09-1.18); P<0.01), seminal vesicle invasion (OR=1.09 (1.07-1.12); P<0.01), positive surgical margins (OR=1.67 (1.47-1.91); P<0.01) and biochemical recurrence (OR=1.67 (1.04-2.69); P<0.01).
CONCLUSIONS:
The presence of MetS is associated with worse oncologic outcomes in men with PCa, in particular with more aggressive tumor features, and biochemical recurrence