Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.
Department of Healthcare Policy and Research, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.
J Urol. 2017 Feb;197(2):363-368. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.08.092. Epub 2016 Aug 26.
The absence of definitive data or explicit guidelines regarding the use of digital rectal examination for prostate cancer screening may lead to confusion for physicians and patients alike. We evaluated the prognostic value of abnormal digital rectal examination and prostate specific antigen following the widespread dissemination of prostate specific antigen testing in the U.S.
Collectively, men comprising the screening arm of the PLCO cancer screening trial who underwent digital rectal examination screening (35,350) were followed for 314,033 person-years. Adjusted analyses with competing risks regression were performed to assess the association of suspicious (nodularity, induration, asymmetry) digital rectal examination and abnormal prostate specific antigen (4 ng/ml or greater) with the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, prostate cancer specific mortality and overall mortality.
Among all screening encounters with a suspicious digital rectal examination only 15.4% had a concurrently abnormal prostate specific antigen (McNemar's test p <0.001). During followup there were 1,612 clinically significant prostate cancers detected, 64 prostate cancer specific deaths and 4,600 deaths. On multivariable analysis suspicious digital rectal examination and abnormal prostate specific antigen were associated with a greater risk of clinically significant prostate cancer (HR 2.21, 95% CI 1.99-2.44 vs HR 5.48, 95% CI 5.05-5.96, p <0.001 and p <0.001) and prostate cancer specific mortality (HR 2.54, 95% CI 1.41-4.58 vs HR 5.23, 95% CI 3.08-8.88, p=0.002 and p <0.001), respectively.
In a secondary analysis of a contemporary U.S. cohort, suspicious digital rectal examination and abnormal prostate specific antigen on routine screening were independently associated with clinically significant prostate cancer and prostate cancer specific mortality. However, additional research is needed to optimize screening protocols.
由于缺乏关于数字直肠检查用于前列腺癌筛查的明确数据或明确指导,这可能会导致医生和患者感到困惑。我们评估了在美国广泛开展前列腺特异性抗原检测后,异常的数字直肠检查和前列腺特异性抗原对前列腺癌预后的价值。
PLCO 癌症筛查试验的筛查组中共有 35350 名接受数字直肠检查筛查的男性,随访时间为 314033 人年。采用竞争风险回归分析对可疑(结节、硬结、不对称)数字直肠检查和异常前列腺特异性抗原(4ng/ml 或更高)与临床显著前列腺癌、前列腺癌特异性死亡率和总死亡率的相关性进行调整分析。
在所有可疑数字直肠检查的筛查中,只有 15.4%同时伴有异常前列腺特异性抗原(McNemar 检验 p<0.001)。在随访期间,共检测到 1612 例临床显著前列腺癌、64 例前列腺癌特异性死亡和 4600 例死亡。多变量分析显示,可疑数字直肠检查和异常前列腺特异性抗原与临床显著前列腺癌的风险增加相关(HR 2.21,95%CI 1.99-2.44 vs HR 5.48,95%CI 5.05-5.96,p<0.001 和 p<0.001)和前列腺癌特异性死亡率(HR 2.54,95%CI 1.41-4.58 vs HR 5.23,95%CI 3.08-8.88,p=0.002 和 p<0.001)。
在对美国当代队列的二次分析中,可疑的数字直肠检查和常规筛查时的异常前列腺特异性抗原与临床显著前列腺癌和前列腺癌特异性死亡率独立相关。然而,需要进一步的研究来优化筛查方案。