ArticleBMC urology2017
Effects of increasing the PSA cutoff to perform additional biomarker tests before prostate biopsy.
Article in BMC urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Stockholm 3 Testing Compared to PSA as the Primary Blood Test in the Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Pathway: A Decision Tree Approach.Applied health economics and health policy · 2022Article
- Article
- Smarter screening for prostate cancer.World journal of urology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMulti-step testing might enhance performance of the prostate cancer diagnostic pipeline. Using PSA >1 ng/ml for first-line risk stratification and the Stockholm 3 Model (S3M) blood-test >10% risk of Gleason Score > 7 prostate cancer to inform biopsy decisions has been suggested. We aimed to determine the effects of changing the PSA cutoff to perform reflex testing with S3M and the subsequent S3M cutoff to recommend prostate biopsy while maintaining the sensitivity to detect Gleason Score ≥ 7 prostate cancer.
methodsWe used data from the prospective, population-based, paired, diagnostic Stockholm 3 (STHLM3) study with participants invited by date of birth from the Swedish Population Register during 2012-2014. All participants underwent testing with PSA and S3M (a combination of plasma protein biomarkers [PSA, free PSA, intact PSA, hK2, MSMB, MIC1], genetic polymorphisms, and clinical variables [age, family, history, previous prostate biopsy, prostate exam]). Of 47,688 men in the STHLM3 main study, we used data from 3133 men with S3M >10% and prostate biopsy data. Logistic regression models were used to calculate prostate cancer detection rates and proportion saved biopsies.
results44.2%, 62.5% and 67.9% of the participants had PSA <1, <1.5 and <1.7 ng/ml, respectively. Increasing the PSA cut-off for additional work-up from 1 ng/ml to 1.5 ng/ml would thus save 18.3% of the performed tests, 4.9% of the biopsies and 1.3% (10/765) of Gleason Grade ≥ 7 cancers would be un-detected. By lowering the S3M cutoff to recommend biopsy, sensitivity to high-grade prostate cancer can be restored, to the cost of increasing the number of performed biopsies modestly.
conclusionThe sensitivity to detect prostate cancer can be maintained when using different PSA cutoffs to perform additional testing. Biomarker cut-offs have implications on number of tests and prostate biopsies performed. A PSA cutoff of 1.5 ng/ml to perform additional testing such as the S3M test might be considered.
trial registrationISRCTN84445406 .
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.