We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Predictors for biopsy outcome in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (Rotterdam region).
Prostate 1999 June 2
BACKGROUND: In the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC, Rotterdam region), men aged 55-74 years are screened for prostate cancer by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) sampling, digital rectal examination (DRE), and transrectal ultrasound investigation (TRUS). All men with a PSA > or =4 ng/ml and/or a suspicious DRE and/or a suspicious TRUS are biopsied.
METHODS: Logistic regression analysis was applied to derive a predictive index that equals the chance to find prostate cancer in a biopsy given the outcomes of the screening tests. This model was used to assess the number of cancers that could have been detected if all men had been biopsied (extrapolation). Furthermore, the model was used to study the possibilities for improvement of the current screening protocol.
RESULTS: PSA was the dominant predictor for prostate cancer in a biopsy, followed by prostate volume, DRE, and TRUS result. It is assessed that 69% (95% CI, 52-86%) of cancers that could be identified if all men were biopsied are currently detected. Application of the same methods to screening data obtained in Göteborg (the Swedish ERSPC partner) yielded almost identical results. It was found that, in the Rotterdam protocol, a considerable number of men were biopsied according to the screening protocol with an assessed lower chance to have prostate cancer than men who were not biopsied according to the protocol.
CONCLUSIONS: The chance to detect prostate cancer in a biopsy can be modeled quite accurately as a function of serum PSA, prostate volume, DRE, and TRUS results. Important improvements in the screening protocol can be achieved by the application of the predictive index.
METHODS: Logistic regression analysis was applied to derive a predictive index that equals the chance to find prostate cancer in a biopsy given the outcomes of the screening tests. This model was used to assess the number of cancers that could have been detected if all men had been biopsied (extrapolation). Furthermore, the model was used to study the possibilities for improvement of the current screening protocol.
RESULTS: PSA was the dominant predictor for prostate cancer in a biopsy, followed by prostate volume, DRE, and TRUS result. It is assessed that 69% (95% CI, 52-86%) of cancers that could be identified if all men were biopsied are currently detected. Application of the same methods to screening data obtained in Göteborg (the Swedish ERSPC partner) yielded almost identical results. It was found that, in the Rotterdam protocol, a considerable number of men were biopsied according to the screening protocol with an assessed lower chance to have prostate cancer than men who were not biopsied according to the protocol.
CONCLUSIONS: The chance to detect prostate cancer in a biopsy can be modeled quite accurately as a function of serum PSA, prostate volume, DRE, and TRUS results. Important improvements in the screening protocol can be achieved by the application of the predictive index.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app