Predicting prostate cancer many years before diagnosis: how and why?

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10021, USA.
World Journal of Urology (Impact Factor: 3.42). 11/2011; 30(2):131-5. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-011-0795-8
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Evidence of reduced prostate cancer mortality from randomized trials in Europe supports early detection of prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Yet PSA screening has generated considerable controversy: it is far from clear that the benefits outweigh risks, in terms of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. One way to shift the ratio of benefits to harm is to focus on men at highest risk, who have more to benefit than average. Neither family history nor any of the currently identified genomic markers offer sufficient risk stratification for practical use. However, there is considerable evidence that the levels of PSA in blood are strongly prognostic of the long-term risk of aggressive prostate cancer. Specifically, it is difficult to justify continuing to screen men aged 60 or older if they have a PSA less than 1 or 2 ng/ml; for men 45-60, intervals between PSA tests can be based on PSA levels, with 2-4-year retesting interval for men with PSA of 1 ng/ml or higher, and tests every 6-8 years for men with PSA <1 ng/ml. Men with the top 10% of PSAs at a young age (PSA ~1.5 ng/ml or higher below 50) are at particularly high risk and should be subject to intensive monitoring.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article updates advances in prostate cancer screening based on prostate-specific antigen, its derivatives, and human kallikrein markers. Many men are diagnosed with indolent disease not requiring treatment. Although there is evidence of a survival benefit from screening, the numbers needed to screen and treat remain high. There is risk of exposing men to the side effects of treatment for nonthreatening disease. A screening test is needed with sufficiently good performance characteristics to detect disease at an early stage so treatment may be offered with curative intent, while reducing the number of negative or unnecessary biopsies.
    Urologic Clinics of North America 05/2014; 41(2):267-276. · 1.35 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Overdiagnosis as a consequence of PSA screening for prostate cancer is a major hazard of modern medicine, claims Margaret McCartney. Jon Rees, GP with a special interest in men's health, and urologist Roger Kirby respond with their perspectives on this dilemma. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons
    Trends in Urology & Men's Health. 03/2013; 4(2).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Das PSA-Screening konnte in der ERSPC-Studie eine Reduktion der relativen prostatakarzinomspezifischen Mortalität von bis zu 32 % zeigen. Dieser Vorteil wird jedoch weiterhin erkauft mit einem hohen Maß an Überdiagnostik und Übertherapie. Zusammen mit volkswirtschaftlichen Überlegungen ist deshalb ein generelles PSA-Screening nicht empfehlenswert. Gleichzeitig bleibt PSA der zurzeit beste Tumormarker, um dem Wunsch des Patienten nach individueller Risikoreduktion gerecht zu werden.Ein möglicher Ausweg wäre ein risikoadaptiertes PSA-Screening in einer definierten Altersgruppe: So konnte in Studien eine strenge Korrelation zwischen PSA-Höhe in frühen Lebensabschnitten und dem Risiko, Jahrzehnte später am Prostatakarzinom zu erkranken, nachgewiesen werden. Dieser Zusammenhang ermöglicht eine Risikostratifizierung anhand des individuellen ,,Baseline“-PSA, um so Hoch-Risiko-Patienten frühzeitig zu identifizieren und solche mit geringem Risiko vor Überdiagnostik und -therapie zu schützen. Die prospektiv randomisierte PROBASE-Studie untersucht dabei den optimalen Zeitpunkt zur Bestimmung eines ,,Baseline“-PSA und bewertet darüber hinaus das ideale zeitliche Protokoll eines solchen ,,intelligenten“ PSA-Screenings.
    Der Onkologe 01/2013; 19(9). · 0.13 Impact Factor


1 Download
Available from