Dataset Information

Is prostate specific antigen (PSA) density necessary in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance and what should be the cutoff in the Asian population?

ABSTRACT:

Background

To investigate the role of Prostate Specific Antigen density (PSAD) in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance (AS) and to determine a cutoff PSAD in identifying adverse pathological outcomes.

Methods

Data from 287 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Six different AS protocols, the University of Toronto; Royal Marsden; John Hopkins; University of California San Francisco (UCSF); Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS), were applied to the cohort. Pre-operative demographics and pathological outcomes were analysed. Statistical analyses on the predictive factors of adverse pathological outcomes and significance of PSAD were performed. A cutoff PSAD with best balance between sensitivity and specificity in identifying adverse pathological outcome was determined.

Results

PSAD predicted adverse pathological outcomes better than Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) level alone. The PSAD was significantly lower (0.12-0.13 ng/dl/ml) in protocols including PSAD (the John Hopkins and PRIAS) compared with the other four protocols not including PSAD as a selection criteria (0.21-0.25 ng/dl/dl, P = 0.00). PSAD predicted adverse pathological outcomes in all protocols not incorporating PSAD as an inclusion criteria (P = 0.00-0.02). By the receiver operator characteristics curve analysis, it was found that a PSAD level of 0.19 ng/ml/ml had the best balance between sensitivity and specificity in predicting pathological adverse disease (Area under curve = 0.63, P = 0.004).

Conclusion

PSAD is necessary in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance. It predicts adverse pathological outcomes in patients eligible for active surveillance better than PSA level alone. A PSAD cutoff at 0.19 ng/ml/ml has the best balance between sensitivity and specificity in predicting pathological adverse disease. We recommend using AS protocol incorporating PSAD as a selection criteria (in particular the PRIAS protocol with a cutoff PSAD at 0.2 ng/ml/ml) when recruiting prostate cancer patients for AS.

SUBMITTER: Tsang CF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6664316 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Is prostate specific antigen (PSA) density necessary in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance and what should be the cutoff in the Asian population?

Tsang Chiu-Fung CF Lai Terence C T TCT Lam Wayne W Ho Brian S H BSH Ng Ada T L ATL Ma Wai-Kit WK Yiu Ming-Kwong MK Tsu James H L JHL

Prostate international 20180312 2

<h4>Background</h4>To investigate the role of Prostate Specific Antigen density (PSAD) in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance (AS) and to determine a cutoff PSAD in identifying adverse pathological outcomes.<h4>Methods</h4>Data from 287 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Six different AS protocols, the University of Toronto; Royal Marsden; John Hopkins; University of California San Francisco (UCSF); Memorial Sloa ...[more]

PMID: 31384609

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFor men on active surveillance for prostate cancer, utility of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics (PSAk) in predicting pathologic reclassification remains controversial.ObjectiveTo develop prediction methods for utilizing serial PSA and evaluate frequency of collection.Design, setting, and participantsData were collected from men enrolled in the multicenter Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study, for whom PSA data were measured and biopsies performed on prespecified schedules. We developed a PSAk parameter based on a linear mixed-effect model (LMEM) that accounted for serial PSA levels.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe association of diagnostic PSA and/or PSAk with time to reclassification (increase in cancer grade and/or volume) was evaluated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models.Results and limitationsA total of 851 men met the study criteria; 255 (30%) had a reclassification event within 5 yr. Median follow-up was 3.7 yr. After adjusting for prostate size, time since diagnosis, biopsy parameters, and diagnostic PSA, PSAk was a significant predictor of reclassification (hazard ratio for each 0.10 increase in PSAk=1.6 [95% confidence interval 1.2-2.1, p<0.001]). The PSAk model improved stratification of risk prediction for the top and bottom deciles of risk over a model without PSAk. Model performance was essentially identical using PSA data measured every 6 mo to those measured every 3 mo. The major limitation is the reliability of reclassification as an end point, although it drives most treatment decisions.ConclusionsPSAk calculated using an LMEM statistically significantly predicts biopsy reclassification. Models that use repeat PSA measurements outperform a model incorporating only diagnostic PSA. Model performance is similar using PSA assessed every 3 or 6 mo. If validated, these results should inform optimal incorporation of PSA trends into active surveillance protocols and risk calculators.Patient summaryIn this report, we looked at whether repeat prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurements, or PSA kinetics, improve prediction of biopsy outcomes in men using active surveillance to manage localized prostate cancer. We found that in a large multicenter active surveillance cohort, PSA kinetics improves the prediction of surveillance biopsy outcome.

Project description:BackgroundActive surveillance (AS) is a management option for men diagnosed with lower risk prostate cancer. There is wide variation in all aspects of AS internationally, from patient selection to investigations and follow-up intervals, and a lack of clear evidence on the optimal approach to AS. This study aimed to provide guidance for clinicians from an international panel of prostate cancer experts.MethodsA modified Delphi approach was undertaken, utilising two rounds of online questionnaires followed by a face-to-face workshop. Participants indicated their level of agreement with statements relating to patient selection for AS via online questionnaires on a 7-point Likert scale. Factors not achieving agreement were iteratively developed between the two rounds of questionnaires. Draft statements were presented at the face-to-face workshop for discussion and consensus building.Results12 prostate cancer experts (9 urologists, 2 academics, 1 radiation oncologist) participated in this study from a range of geographical regions (4 USA, 4 Europe, 4 Australia). Complete agreement on statements presented to the participants was 29.4% after Round One and 69.0% after Round Two. Following robust discussions at the face-to-face workshop, agreement was reached on the remaining statements. PSA, PSA density, Multiparametric MRI, and systematic biopsy (with or without targeted biopsy) were identified as minimum diagnostic tests required upon which to select patients to recommend AS as a treatment option for prostate cancer. Patient factors and clinical parameters that identified patients appropriate to potentially receive AS were agreed. Genetic and genomic testing was not recommended for use in clinical decision-making regarding AS.ConclusionsThe lack of consistency in the practice of AS for men with lower risk prostate cancer between and within countries was reflected in this modified Delphi study. There are, however, areas of common practice and agreement from which clinicians practicing in the current environment can use to inform their clinical practice to achieve the best outcomes for patients.

Dataset Information

Is prostate specific antigen (PSA) density necessary in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance and what should be the cutoff in the Asian population?

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Is prostate specific antigen (PSA) density necessary in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance and what should be the cutoff in the Asian population?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets