European urology oncology · 2023
Digital Rectal Examination Is Not a Useful Screening Test for Prostate Cancer.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Krilaviciute Agne, Becker Nikolaus, Lakes Jale, Radtke Jan Philipp, Kuczyk Markus, Peters Inga, Harke Nina N, Debus Jürgen, Koerber Stefan A, Herkommer Kathleen, Gschwend Jürgen E, Meissner Valentin H, Benner Axel, Seibold Petra, Kristiansen Glen, Hadaschik Boris, Arsov Christian, Schimmöller Lars, Giesel Frederik Lars, Antoch Gerald, Makowski Marcus, Wacker Frank, Schlemmer Heinz-Peter, Kaaks Rudolf, Albers Peter
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Annual digital rectal examination (DRE) is recommended as a stand-alone screening test for prostate cancer (PCa) in Germany for 45+ yr olds. DRE diagnostic performance in men as young as 45 yr old has not been proved by a screening trial.
OBJECTIVE: To determine DRE diagnostic performance in a screening trial.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This analysis was conducted within the multicentric, randomized PROBASE trial, which enrolled >46 000 men at age 45 to test risk-adapted prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for PCa.
INTERVENTION: (1) DRE was analyzed as a one-time, stand-alone screening offer at age 45 in 6537 men in one arm of the trial and (2) PCa detection by DRE was evaluated at the time of PSA-screen-driven biopsies (N = 578).
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: (1) True-/false-positive detection rates of DRE as compared with PSA screening and (2) DRE outcome at the time of a prostate biopsy were evaluated.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: (1) A prospective analysis of 57 men with suspicious DRE at age 45 revealed three PCa. Detection rate by DRE was 0.05% (three of 6537) as compared with a four-fold higher rate by PSA screening (48 of 23 301, 0.21%). The true-positive detection rate by DRE relative to screening by PSA was 0.22 (95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.07-0.72]) and the false-positive detection rate by DRE was 2.2 (95% CI = [1.50-3.17]). (2) Among PSA-screen-detected PCa cases, 86% had unsuspicious DRE (sensitivity relative to PSA was 14%), with the majority of these tumors (86%) located in the potentially accessible zones of the prostate as seen by magnetic resonance imaging.
CONCLUSIONS: The performance of stand-alone DRE to screen for PCa is poor. DRE should not be recommended as a PCa screening test in young men. Furthermore, DRE does not improve the detection of PSA-screen-detected PCa.
PATIENT SUMMARY: Our report demonstrated the poor diagnostic performance of digital rectal examination in the screening for prostate cancer in young men.
OBJECTIVE: To determine DRE diagnostic performance in a screening trial.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This analysis was conducted within the multicentric, randomized PROBASE trial, which enrolled >46 000 men at age 45 to test risk-adapted prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for PCa.
INTERVENTION: (1) DRE was analyzed as a one-time, stand-alone screening offer at age 45 in 6537 men in one arm of the trial and (2) PCa detection by DRE was evaluated at the time of PSA-screen-driven biopsies (N = 578).
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: (1) True-/false-positive detection rates of DRE as compared with PSA screening and (2) DRE outcome at the time of a prostate biopsy were evaluated.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: (1) A prospective analysis of 57 men with suspicious DRE at age 45 revealed three PCa. Detection rate by DRE was 0.05% (three of 6537) as compared with a four-fold higher rate by PSA screening (48 of 23 301, 0.21%). The true-positive detection rate by DRE relative to screening by PSA was 0.22 (95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.07-0.72]) and the false-positive detection rate by DRE was 2.2 (95% CI = [1.50-3.17]). (2) Among PSA-screen-detected PCa cases, 86% had unsuspicious DRE (sensitivity relative to PSA was 14%), with the majority of these tumors (86%) located in the potentially accessible zones of the prostate as seen by magnetic resonance imaging.
CONCLUSIONS: The performance of stand-alone DRE to screen for PCa is poor. DRE should not be recommended as a PCa screening test in young men. Furthermore, DRE does not improve the detection of PSA-screen-detected PCa.
PATIENT SUMMARY: Our report demonstrated the poor diagnostic performance of digital rectal examination in the screening for prostate cancer in young men.