ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2012
Biopsy follow-up of prostate-specific antigen tests.
Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Use of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Following an Elevated Prostate-Specific Antigen Test.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Optimization of training and measurement protocol for eNose analysis of urine headspace aimed at prostate cancer diagnosis.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Androgen receptor: structure, role in prostate cancer and drug discovery.Acta pharmacologica Sinica · 2015Review
- Five-year downstream outcomes following prostate-specific antigen screening in older men.JAMA internal medicine · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level above 4 ng/mL has historically been recognized as an appropriate threshold to recommend biopsy; however the risk of high-grade disease observed among men with lower PSA levels in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial has led to calls to change the criteria for biopsy referral. PURPOSE: To aid providers when discussing aggressiveness of biopsy by cataloging available community biopsy patterns and determine whether lower PSA thresholds are being used to recommend biopsy.
methodsLaboratory and biopsy records were reviewed among 59,764 men in a large Washington State health plan between 1998 and 2007. Follow-up in the 12-month period after a test was categorized as biopsy, urology visit without biopsy, additional PSA testing with no urology visit, or no PSA-related follow-up. Data analysis occurred between 2010 and 2011.
resultsTwenty-eight percent of tests with PSA levels ≥4.0 ng/mL, 2.9% of tests with levels between 2.5 and 4.0 ng/mL, and 0.4% of tests with levels <2.5 ng/mL were followed with a biopsy within 12 months. More than 40% of elevated tests (≥4.0 ng/mL) were followed by a urologist visit without a biopsy, and more than 30% of tests ≥4.0 did not have any PSA-related follow-up within 12 months. PSA velocity, defined as annualized rate of change in PSA level, was strongly associated with biopsy, especially when absolute PSA was <4.0 ng/mL. There appear to be no discernable temporal trends in biopsy thresholds or practice patterns based on PSA lower levels or velocity.
conclusionsDespite recent calls to more aggressively recommend biopsy at lower PSA thresholds, the practice in this large health plan has remained consistent over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.