Urological Research Foundation's home page
About the Urological Research Foundation
Prostate Cancer Questions & Answers
Quest Newsletter Articles
Media articles and interviews with Dr. Catalona
Books published by other authors
Dr. Catalona's journal articles from various publications
Dr. Catalona's genetic research for prostate cancer
Donate to the URF for prostate cancer research
View the New Patient Packet sent by Dr. Catalona
Links to other helpful prostate cancer websites
Contact the Urological Research Foundation
Dr. Catalona's Library Articles


PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN CUTOFF OF 2.6 NG/ML FOR PROSTATE CANCER SCREENING IS ASSOCIATED WITH FAVORABLE PATHOLOGIC TUMOR FEATURES.

Krumholtz JS. Carvalhal GF. Ramos CG. Smith DS. Thorson P. Yan Y. Humphrey PA. Roehl KA. Catalona WJ.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the pathologic characteristics of clinical Stage T1c (nonpalpable, prostate-specific antigen [PSA]-detected) prostate cancers detected in the 2.6 to 4.0-ng/mL PSA range and compare them with Stage T1c cancers concurrently detected in the 4.1 to 10.0-ng/mL PSA range. All cancers were detected in a prostate cancer screening study.

METHODS: We studied 94 patients with clinical Stage T1c prostate cancer diagnosed by four or six-sector ultrasound-guided needle biopsy who underwent radical prostatectomy between June 1995 and December 1996. We included all men whose prostatectomy specimens were processed with complete embedding of all prostatic tissue. Of these, 42 had a PSA level of 2.6 to 4.0 ng/mL and 52 a PSA level 4.1 to 10.0 ng/mL at the time of cancer detection. We determined the tumor volume by complete embedding and grid morphometry, pathologic stage, Gleason sum, and surgical margin status and compared the cancer volume and pathologic tumor stages for each group.

RESULTS: Men with cancer detected at the 2.6 to 4.0 ng/mL PSA range had significantly smaller cancer volumes (1.1 +/- 1.1 cm(3) versus 1.8 +/- 1.5 cm(3), P = 0.02); however, no difference was found in the proportion (11.9% versus 11.5%, P = 0.9, and 23.8% versus 26.9%, P = 0.7, respectively) of tumors that met previously published criteria of "clinically insignificant" (organ confined, less than 0.2 cm(3) tumor volume, Gleason sum 6 or less) or "clinically unimportant" (organ confined, less than 0.5 cm(3) tumor volume, and Gleason sum 6 or less) tumors. Using the lower PSA cutoff point resulted in the detection of a significantly higher percentage of organ-confined tumors (88% versus 63%, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS: The use of a 2.6-ng/mL PSA threshold for screening resulted in the more frequent detection of small, organ-confined tumors without overdetecting possibly clinically insignificant ones.

Institution: Division of Urologic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri 63110, USA.


Urology. 60(3):469-73; discussion 473-4, 2002 Sep.


Home    |    About the URF   |    Q & A - Prostate Cancer   |    Quest Articles
Journal Articles   |    National Media   |    Suggested Reading   |    Genetic Research
Donations   |    New Patient Packet   |    Post-Op Advice   |    Helpful Links   |    Contact Us