总体和自由型前列腺特异抗原指数在日本人群前列腺癌筛选中的价值和局限性(英文)
Total and free prostate-specific antigen indexes in prostate cancer screening:value and limitation for Japanese populations作者机构:Department of UrologyNiigata Cancer Center HospitalNiigata 951-8133Japan Division of UrologyDepartment of Regenerative and Transplant MedicineGraduate School of Medical and Dental SciencesNiigata UniversityNiigata 951-8510Japan Department of UrologyNiigata Cancer Center HospitalNiigata 951-8133Japan
出 版 物:《Asian Journal of Andrology》 (亚洲男性学杂志(英文版))
年 卷 期:2006年第8卷第4期
页 面:429-434,514-515页
核心收录:
学科分类:1002[医学-临床医学] 100214[医学-肿瘤学] 10[医学]
主 题:prostate cancer screening free/total prostate-specific antigen ratio multi-site biopsy single-institutional trial
摘 要:Aim:To assess the efficacy and limitation of free/total prostate-specific antigen ratio(f/tPSA)at a single institution in Japan,focusing on the avoidance of pointless prostate ***:In total,631 men between 44 and 93 years old(mean 69.8 years)with elevated PSA underwent power-Doppler ultrasoundgraphy-guided transrectal 10-core prostate biopsies at Niigata Cancer Center Hospital,and their histological features were investigated with total PSA (tPSA)and f/***:PCa was detected in 126 of 134 patients(94.3%)with tPSA of 26 ng/mL or *** detection rate was 59.4% for tPSA of 21-25 ng/mL,followed by 39.2% for 16-20 ng/mL,30.0% for 11-15 ng/mL, 20.0% for 4.1-10 ng/mL and 7.6% for≤4.0 ng/mL,f/tPSA of the PCa group was significantly lower than that of non-malignamt disorders in any tPSA ranges(mean 0.122 vs.0.160,P0.001).Receiver-operating characteristics analyses showed that f/tPSA(AUC:0.664)performed more valuably than tPSA(AUC:0.559)in patients with tPSA between 3.0-10 ng/mL(P0.01).Although f/tPSA of 0.250 for the cut-off value might miss 1.8% PCa patients,it potentially spares 9.2% of unnecessary ***:f/tPSA is more valuable compared with tPSA alone for the prediction of the occurrence of *** recommend 0.250 as the cut-off value for f/tPSA in PCa screening for Asian men having so-called grey-zone tPSA.(Asian J Androl 2006 Jul;8:429-434)