Performance of an ultra-fast deep-learning accelerated MRI screening protocol for prostate cancer compared to a standard multiparametric protocol

OBJECTIVES

To establish and evaluate an ultra-fast MRI screening protocol for prostate cancer (PCa) in comparison to the standard multiparametric (mp) protocol, reducing scan time and maintaining adequate diagnostic performance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective single-center study included consecutive biopsy-naïve patients with suspected PCa between December 2022 and March 2023. A PI-RADSv2.1 conform mpMRI protocol was acquired in a 3 T scanner (scan time: 25 min 45 sec). In addition, two deep-learning (DL) accelerated sequences (T2- and diffusion-weighted) were acquired, serving as a screening protocol (scan time: 3 min 28 sec). Two readers evaluated image quality and the probability of PCa regarding PI-RADSv2.1 scores in two sessions. The diagnostic performance of the screening protocol with mpMRI serving as the reference standard was derived. Inter- and intra-reader agreements were evaluated using weighted kappa statistics.

RESULTS

We included 77 patients with 97 lesions (mean age: 66 years; SD: 7.7). Diagnostic performance of the screening protocol was excellent with a sensitivity and specificity of 100%/100% and 89%/98% (cut-off ≥ PI-RADS 4) for reader 1 (R1) and reader 2 (R2), respectively. Mean image quality was 3.96 (R1) and 4.35 (R2) for the standard protocol vs. 4.74 and 4.57 for the screening protocol (p < 0.05). Inter-reader agreement was moderate (κ: 0.55) for the screening protocol and substantial (κ: 0.61) for the multiparametric protocol.

CONCLUSION

The ultra-fast screening protocol showed similar diagnostic performance and better imaging quality compared to the mpMRI in under 15% of scan time, improving efficacy and enabling the implementation of screening protocols in clinical routine.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

The ultra-fast protocol enables examinations without contrast administration, drastically reducing scan time to 3.5 min with similar diagnostic performance and better imaging quality. This facilitates patient-friendly, efficient examinations and addresses the conflict of increasing demand for examinations at currently exhausted capacities.

KEY POINTS

Time-consuming MRI protocols are in conflict with an expected increase in examinations required for prostate cancer screening. An ultra-fast MRI protocol shows similar performance and better image quality compared to the standard protocol. Deep-learning acceleration facilitates efficient and patient-friendly examinations, thus improving prostate cancer screening capacity.

Determinants of receipt of prostate cancer screening among men living with HIV enrolled in an urban HIV Clinic in the United States over the period of 2000-2020

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is projected to account for the greatest proportion of cancer-related burden among men with HIV. However, incidence is reportedly lower than in men without HIV, potentially due to differences in screening. Factors influencing receipt of screening in men with HIV are unknown. We described receipt of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and assessed factors for association with receipt of PSA test.

METHODS

Demographics, measures of HIV and related care, and non-HIV care were assessed for association with receipt of first PSA test in men ≥40 years old each calendar year in 2000-2020 using univariable and multivariable Poisson regression. Models were additionally stratified by calendar period to identify changes in determinants of PSA test as prostate cancer screening guidelines changed.

RESULTS

Men (n = 2,063) 72% Non-Hispanic Black, median age of 47 (IQR: 41, 53), contributed median of 4.7 years (IQR: 2.3, 10.0) of follow-up. Receipt of antiretroviral therapy (aIRR = 1.33; 95% CI: 1.14, 1.55), engagement in HIV care (aIRR = 2.09; 95% CI: 1.66, 2.62), history of testosterone-replacement therapy (aIRR = 1.34; 95% CI: 1.19, 1.50), urologist evaluation (aIRR = 1.66; 95% CI: 1.35, 2.05), and receipt of PSA test in preceding two years (no elevated PSA aIRR = 2.37; 95% CI: 2.16, 2.61; elevated PSA aIRR = 4.35; 95% CI: 3.24, 5.84) were associated with PSA testing in men aged 50 or older. Associations varied across calendar time.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest men with greater interaction with healthcare are more likely to receive PSA test. Measures of control of HIV did not appear to influence the decision to screen.

A new promising indicator in prostate cancer screening: Prostate-specific antigen fluctuation rate

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether PSA fluctuation can be used to predict the risk of prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included 1244 patients who underwent prostate biopsy at Kartal Dr. Lutfi Kirdar City Hospital between 2013 and 2021 (848 in non-cancer; 396 in cancer). The patient's age, last two PSA values (PSA1 and PSA2) within three months before the biopsy, the duration between two PSAs (days), prostate size (g) and PSA density (PSAD) were all recorded. PSA fluctuation rate (PSAfr) was defined as the change rate between two PSA values.

RESULTS

PSAfr was significantly higher in the non-cancer group than in the prostate cancer group (15.2% (20.5) and 9.6% (14.4), P=.019). A Simple linear regression was used to examine the relationship between PSAfr and other factors such as age, PSA, PSAD, and prostate volume, but it was shown that these had no effect on PSA fluctuations. ROC analysis revealed a relatively low Area Under the Curve (AUC) for PSAfr (AUC, 0.584 (0.515-0.653)). However, the cut-off value of 12.35% was found to be significant, with a sensitivity of 58% and a specificity of 59% (P:.019, 95%CI). The odds ratio, adjusted for age, PSAD, and PSA2, was calculated as 0.545 (0.33-0.89) using logistic regression analysis to show the relationship between prostate cancer and PSAfr. As a result, those with high PSAfr were found to be 1.83 times less likely to be diagnosed with prostate cancer than those with low fluctuations.

CONCLUSION

PSAfr could be used in nomograms to predict prostate cancer risk and reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies.

Shared medical decision in prostate cancer screening in primary care: a systematic literature review of current evidence

PURPOSE

Prostate cancer screening has not significantly reduced mortality. International guidelines strongly endorse shared decision-making to navigate risks, emphasizing its crucial role prior to prescribing a prostate-specific antigen test. This study aims to provide insight into the current role of shared decision-making in primary care for prostate cancer screening and suggest ways to improve the process.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane, and Lissa databases were searched for following terms: 'prostate-specific antigen' or 'prostate cancer screening' combined with 'shared decision making', 'informed decision making' or 'decision support' and 'primary care'. All studies were screened by two independent reviewers. This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Of 85 articles screened, 34 were included. Key findings included heterogenous and poor quality implementation of shared decision-making in practice, patients with limited knowledge of shared decision-making, clinicians infrequently discussing patients' views, decision aids that could be better integrated into practice, and finally, changes in care systems to support the expansion of shared decision-making in prostate cancer screening.

CONCLUSION

Decision aids are essential tools in the informed decision-making process. Integrating these elements into practice would require training for doctors and adjustments to the healthcare system.

Prevalence of Shared Decision-making in Prostate Cancer Screening in New York State

Current guidelines recommend that physicians use a shared decision-making (SDM) approach to engage with patients on the potential benefits and harms of prostate cancer screening based on their individual risk. In a sample of 4,118 men aged 55-69 from the 2018 New York State Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey (BRFSS), we compared the frequency of screening recommendations and SDM conversations according to four race/ethnic groups. In logistic regression, we evaluated the likelihood of SDM conversations between race/ethnic groups. Our findings suggest that the odds of never having a SDM conversation with their healthcare provider were significantly higher among Hispanic men (OR 95% CI: 2.10, 1.11-3.99) and other/multiracial men (OR, 95% CI: 3.08, 1.46-6.52) compared to white men, while black men had comparable odds (1.52, 0.98-2.34). The lower frequency of SDM conversation among Hispanic and other/multiracial men suggest a missed opportunity for healthcare providers to guide informed screening decisions.

Impact of PSA testing on secondary care costs in England and Wales: estimates from the Cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for Prostate cancer (CAP)

BACKGROUND

Screening men for prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing remains controversial. We aimed to estimate the likely budgetary impact on secondary care in England and Wales to inform screening decision makers.

METHODS

The Cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for Prostate cancer study (CAP) compared a single invitation to men aged 50-69 for a PSA test with usual care (no screening). Routinely collected hospital care data were obtained for all men in CAP, and NHS reference costs were mapped to each event via Healthcare Resource Group (HRG) codes. Secondary-care costs per man per year were calculated, and cost differences (and population-level estimates) between arms were derived annually for the first five years following randomisation.

RESULTS

In the first year post-randomisation, secondary-care costs averaged across all men (irrespective of a prostate cancer diagnosis) in the intervention arm (n = 189279) were £44.80 (95% confidence interval: £18.30-£71.30) higher than for men in the control arm (n = 219357). Extrapolated to a population level, the introduction of a single PSA screening invitation could lead to additional secondary care costs of £314 million.

CONCLUSIONS

Introducing a single PSA screening test for men aged 50-69 across England and Wales could lead to very high initial secondary-care costs.

Assessing knowledge, attitude and practice towards prostate cancer screening among males in Southwest Tanzania: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is common among men, and awareness can reduce associated deaths. Low knowledge of prostate cancer screening and wrong perceptions about prostate cancer leads to poor screening practices. Our study assessed knowledge, attitude and practice towards prostate cancer screening among male adults at Mbeya Zonal Referral Hospital.

METHODS

This hospital-based cross-sectional study used a random sampling technique to select men attending the hospital. Data was collected using a questionnaire on socio-demographic characteristics, personal and familiar medical history of prostate cancer, knowledge about prostate cancer and its screening. Data analysis was done using SPSS version 23.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-two (132) men participated in the study. Participants ranged from 18 to 75 years, with a mean age of 41.57. This study found that while 72% of respondents had heard of prostate cancer, only 43.9% had knowledge of prostate cancer screening. Age was associated with prostate cancer screening knowledge (COR = 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01-1.54, p < 0.001). Only 29.5% of respondents had a positive attitude toward prostate cancer screening. A small percentage (16.7%) had been tested for prostate cancer, but the majority (89.4%) were willing to be screened in the future.

CONCLUSION

The study found that while most men in the study area had a basic understanding of prostate cancer, only a small percentage had a favourable knowledge of prostate cancer screening, with a low positive perception of screening. The study highlights the need to increase awareness of prostate cancer screening in Tanzania.

The Impact of Receipt of Information on Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing on Screening with the Prostate-Specific Antigen Test

There is controversy on prostate cancer screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test in the USA, and as a result, there has been an increased push for physicians to have a thorough discussion with patients on the advantages and disadvantages of prostate cancer screening with the PSA blood test. Prior studies showed that pre-screening discussions increased the likelihood of PSA testing. This study is aimed at examining the impact of discussions of the advantages and disadvantages of the PSA test among men that fit the prostate cancer screening guidelines determined by the American Urological Association (AUA). This cross-sectional study used secondary data from the 2018 Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) in the USA. The analytic sample was determined based on the American Urological Association (AUA) guidelines for prostate cancer screening (n = 54,607). Approximately, 89.5% of men underwent PSA testing. The odds of PSA testing were higher for men who received information on only the advantages of PSA testing (OR = 3.40, 95% CI = 2.80, 4.13), only the disadvantages of PSA testing (OR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.02, 2.28), and both advantages and disadvantages of PSA testing (OR = 2.99, 95% CI = 2.46, 3.63) compared to men who received no information. Discussions with men, that meet the requirements for prostate cancer screening, about the advantages and disadvantages of PSA testing increased the likelihood that men would undergo PSA testing.

Development and pilot testing of EHR-nudges to reduce overuse in older primary care patients

BACKGROUND

Unnecessary testing and treatment of common conditions in older adults can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. The primary objective of this study was to develop and pilot test a set of clinical decision support (CDS) alerts informed by social psychology to address overuse in three areas related to ambulatory care of older adults.

METHODS

We developed three electronic health record (EHR) CDS alerts to address overuse and pilot tested them from January 17, 2019 to July 17, 2019. We enrolled 14 primary care physicians from three practices within a large health system who cared for adults aged 65 years and older. Three measures of overuse applied to patients meeting the following criteria: ordering of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for prostate cancer screening in adult men aged 76 years and older, ordering of urinalysis or urine cultures (UA or UC) for non-specific reasons to identify bacteriuria in women aged 65 years and older, and overtreatment of diabetes with insulin or oral hypoglycemic medications in adults aged at 75 years and older (DM). Clinicians received CDS alerts when criteria for any of the three overuse measures were met. We then surveyed clinicians to evaluate their experience with the CDS alerts.

RESULTS

The number of clinical encounters that triggered CDS alerts was 19 for PSA, 48 for UA/UC and 128 for DM. For PSA encounters, 4 (21%) orders were not performed after the alert. In the UA/UC encounters 29 (60%) orders were not performed after the alert. For the DM encounters, 21 (34%) had diabetes therapy reduced following the alert. Survey respondents indicated that the alerts were clinically accurate and sometimes led them to change their clinical action.

CONCLUSIONS

These CDS alerts were feasible to implement and may minimize unnecessary testing and treatment of common conditions in older adults.

Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening in Transgender Patients

CONTEXT

Approximately 0.4-1.3% of the worldwide population is transgender. Although the exact prevalence is unknown, there is an increase in open identification as transgender. Among transgender women (TW), the prostate is retained even after gender-affirmation surgery, thus necessitating ongoing screening for prostate cancer (CaP). However, little is known about CaP screening in this population.

OBJECTIVE

To assess our current understanding of CaP incidence and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in TW.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a nonsystematic narrative review of all PubMed publications through June 2022 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Given the limited primary research on this subject, case reports were also included. Studies were reviewed to understand PSA screening practices and reports of CaP in this population, as applicable.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

There is no consensus regarding PSA screening in TW from any of the major societies, and TW are largely absent from guidelines. Case report data suggest that TW with CaP may have more aggressive disease, and these cancers may have been pre-existing prior to present before gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) or be castrate-resistant.

CONCLUSIONS

We are in the infancy of our understanding of PSA screening in TW. Important avenues for future research include understanding the risks/benefits of PSA screening in TW, how best to mitigate potential negative psychological effects of PSA screening in TW, establishing baseline PSA values for those on GAHT (and determining what values should be considered "elevated"), establishing when to initiate PSA screening for those on GAHT, and establishing the accuracy of biomarkers for those undergoing GAHT.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We examined patterns of prostate cancer screening for transgender women. Little is known about prostate cancer incidence or screening in this population. Additional research is needed to establish guidelines for screening in this population.

Prostate cancer screening: Continued controversies and novel biomarker advancements

Prostate cancer (PCa) screening remains one of the most controversial topics in clinical and public health. Despite being the second most common cancer in men worldwide, recommendations for screening using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) are unclear. Early detection and the resulting postscreening treatment lead to overdiagnosis and overtreatment of otherwise indolent cases. In addition, several unwanted harms are associated with PCa screening process. This literature review focuses on the limitations of PSA-specific PCa screening, reasons behind the screening controversy, and the novel biomarkers and advanced innovative methodologies that improve the limitations of traditional screening using PSA. With the verdict of whether or not to screen not yet unanimous, we hope to aid in resolution of the long-standing debate.

Routine systematic prostate biopsies not replaced by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging improves the performance of prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostics through a better selection of patients.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to study the detection rate (DR) of systematic and targeted cognitive biopsies in a cohort with the previous negative systematic biopsies. A secondary objective was to describe the value of prostate-specific antigen density (PSAd) in the detection of clinically significant PCa (CSPCa).

METHODS

We designed a prospective, single-center, and comparative study to determine the DR of systematic and targeted cognitive biopsies. The clinical and pathological characteristics of each patient were described.

RESULTS

A total of 111 patients with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System lesions > 3 were included in the study. PCa was detected in 41.4% (46 of 111 patients); 42 (91.3%) were detected by systematic biopsy and 30 (65.2%) by targeted biopsy. CSPCa was detected in 26 (23.4%), 23 (88.5%) by systematic biopsy, and 21 (76.9%) by targeted biopsy. PSAd > 0.15 was directly associated with CSPCa.

CONCLUSION

The detection of PCa by systematic biopsy in this series was higher than 80%; hence, its routine use should not be replaced by targeted biopsy, since it continues to be the cornerstone of the diagnosis in patients with prior negative biopsies.

Design of Behavioral Economic Applications to Geriatrics Leveraging Electronic Health Records (BEAGLE): A pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Overtesting and treatment of older patients is common and may lead to harms. The Choosing Wisely campaign has provided recommendations to reduce overtesting and overtreatment of older adults. Behavioral economics-informed interventions embedded within the electronic health record (EHR) have been shown to reduce overuse in several areas. Our objective is to conduct a parallel arm, pragmatic cluster-randomized trial to evaluate the effectiveness of behavioral-economics-informed clinical decision support (CDS) interventions previously piloted in primary care clinics and designed to reduce overtesting and overtreatment in older adults.

METHODS/DESIGN

This trial has two parallel arms: clinician education alone vs. clinician education plus behavioral-economics-informed CDS. There are three co-primary outcomes for this trial: (1) prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in older men, (2) urine testing for non-specific reasons in older women, and (3) overtreatment of diabetes in older adults. All eligible primary care clinics from a large regional health system were randomized using a modified constrained randomization process and their attributed clinicians were included. Clinicians were recruited to complete a survey and educational module. We randomized 60 primary care clinics with 374 primary care clinicians and achieved adequate balance between the study arms for prespecified constrained variables. Baseline annual overuse rates for the three co-primary outcomes were 25%, 23%, and 17% for the PSA, urine, and diabetes measures, respectively.

DISCUSSION

This trial is evaluating behavioral-economics-informed EHR-embedded interventions to reduce overuse of specific tests and treatments for older adults. The study will evaluate the effectiveness and safety of these interventions.

Psychosocial and clinical predictors of continued cancer screening in older adults

OBJECTIVE

Many older adults (aged 75+) continue cancer screening despite guidelines suggesting they should not. Using mixed-methods, we examined psychosocial and clinical factors associated with continued breast/prostate screening.

METHODS

We conducted an online, scenario-based, randomized study in Australia with participants aged 65+ years. The primary outcome was screening intention (10-point scale, dichotomized: low (1-5) and high (6-10)). We also measured demographic, psychosocial, and age-related clinical variables. Participants provided reason/s for their screening intentions in free-text.

RESULTS

271 eligible participants completed the survey (aged 65-90 years, 71% adequate health literacy). Those who reported higher cancer anxiety, were men, screened more recently, had family history of breast/prostate cancer and were independent in activities of daily living, were more likely to intend to continue screening. Commonly reported reasons for intending to continue screening were grouped into six themes: routine adherence, the value of knowing, positive screening attitudes, perceived susceptibility, benefits focus, and needing reassurance.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychosocial factors may drive continued cancer screening in older adults and undermine efforts to promote informed decision-making.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

When communicating benefits and harms of cancer screening to older adults, both clinical and psychosocial factors should be discussed to support informed decision-making.

Updates in Prostate Cancer Research and Screening in Men at Genetically Higher Risk

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prostate cancer (PrCa) is the most common cancer in men in the western world and is a major source of morbidity and mortality. Currently, general population PrCa screening is not recommended due to the limitations of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. As such, there is increasing interest in identifying and screening higher-risk groups. The only established risk factors for PrCa are age, ethnicity, and having a family history of PrCa. A significant proportion of PrCa cases are caused by genetic factors.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several rare germline variants have been identified that moderately increase risk of PrCa, and targeting screening to these men is proving useful at detecting clinically significant disease. The use of a "polygenic risk score" (PRS) that can calculate a man's personalized risk based on a number of lower-risk, but common genetic variants is the subject of ongoing research. Research efforts are currently focusing on the utility of screening in specific at-risk populations based on ethnicity, such as men of Black Afro-Caribbean descent. Whilst most screening studies have focused on use of PSA testing, the incorporation of additional molecular and genomic biomarkers alongside increasingly sophisticated imaging modalities is being designed to further refine and individualise both the screening and diagnostic pathway. Approximately 10% of men with advanced PrCa have a germline genetic predisposition leading to the opportunity for novel, targeted precision treatments.

SUMMARY

The mainstreaming of genomics into the PrCa screening, diagnostic and treatment pathway will soon become standard practice and this review summarises current knowledge on genetic predisposition to PrCa and screening studies that are using genomics within their algorithms to target screening to higher-risk groups of men. Finally, we evaluate the importance of germline genetics beyond screening and diagnostics, and its role in the identification of lethal PrCa and in the selection of targeted treatments for advanced disease.

Differences in the relationship between diabetes and prostate cancer among Black and White non-Hispanic men

PURPOSE

Studies finding lower incidence rates of prostate cancer among men with diabetes have been primarily conducted in White non-Hispanic (WNH) populations. The purpose of this analysis is to compare the relationship between diabetes and prostate cancer among Black (BNH) and White non-Hispanic men.

METHODS

We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data from 2011 to 2015 to compare incidence rates and tumor characteristics between BNH and WNH men by diabetes status. Age-adjusted incidence rates and corresponding rate ratios (RR) by diabetes status were calculated overall and by tumor grade, stage, and PSA level separately for BNH and WNH men. We used multivariable logistic regression to compare tumor characteristics among men with prostate cancer in the numerator, both within and across race/ethnic groups.

RESULTS

Overall age-adjusted incidence rates were significantly lower in men with diabetes compared to those without among WNH men [RR = 0.88 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.86-0.90] but there was no difference in rates by diabetes status among BNH men (RR = 1.01 95% CI 0.96-1.07). Men with diabetes were less likely to be diagnosed with distant-staged tumors compared to those without diabetes in both race/ethnic groups but the magnitude of difference by diabetes status was greater in BNH [Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.52 95% CI 0.42-0.64] than WNH (OR = 0.88 95% CI 0.81-0.95) men (p-value for interaction < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The relationship between diabetes and prostate cancer differed between BNH and WNH men. The differences could have implications in evaluating the effectiveness of prostate cancer screening in men with diabetes across racial/ethnic subgroups.

Prostate Cancer Screening for Gay Men in the United States

OBJECTIVES

To elucidate trends of prostate-cancer (PCa) screening in gay and bisexual men and assess the association of sexual orientation with PCa screening in the US.

METHODS

Data for men ≥ 40 years-old with no history of PCa were collected from the National Health Interview Survey for the years 2013, 2015, and 2018. Multivariable logistic regression models were created to determine the associations between sexual orientation and PCa screening and the discussion of advantages and disadvantages prior to PCa screening.

RESULTS

Gay men screened for prostate cancer were younger than their straight counterparts with a median age (IQR) of 58 years (52-66) versus 64 years (56-71). Gay men were more likely to have undergone a screening PSA test (OR 1.56; 95%CI 1.20-2.02) and discuss the advantages of PSA testing with the physician prior to the test (OR 1.64; 95% CI 1.22 - 2.21) when compared to straight men. In yearly analysis, gay men were more likely to have undergone screening in 2013 (OR 1.65, 95%CI 1.01-2.68) and 2015 OR 1.95, 95CI% 1.30-2.91), however, there was no difference when compared to straight men in 2018 (OR 1.32, 95%CI 0.85-2.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Gay men were screened for PCa at a younger age comparted to straight men. They were also more likely to have undergone PCa cancer screening than straight men between 2013-18. Further study is needed to better understand the role of sexual orientation in PCa screening and management.

Improving prostate biopsy decision making in Mexican patients: Still a major public health concern

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer screening has reduced its mortality in 21%. However, this has also led to an increased number of biopsies in order to establish the diagnosis, many of them unnecessary. Current screening guidelines prioritize use of prostatic magnetic resonance and new biomarkers to reduce unnecessary biopsies, however, their implementation in developing countries screening programs is mainly limited by its costs.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate Prostate Biopsy Risk Collaborative Group (PBCG) and Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator (PCPTRC) 2.0 predictions accuracy in Mexican patients in order to guide prostate biopsy decision making and reduce unnecessary biopsies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients between 55 and 90 years old who underwent prostate biopsy in a high-volume center in Mexico between January 2017 and June 2020. Clinical utility of PBCG and PCPTRC 2.0 to predict high-grade prostate cancer (HGPCa) biopsy outcomes was evaluated using decision curve analysis and compared to actual biopsy decision making. Receiver operating characteristics area under the curve (AUC) was used to measure discrimination and external validation.

RESULTS

From 687 patients eligible for prostate biopsy, 433 met selections criteria. One hundred and thirty-five (31.17%) patients were diagnosed with HGPCa, 63 (14.54%) with low-grade disease and 235 (54.27%) had a negative biopsy. PCPTRC 2.0 ≥15% threshold got a standardized net benefit (sNB) of 0.70, while PBCG ≥30% and ≥35% had a sNB of 0.27 and 0.15, respectively. Use of both models for guiding prostate biopsy decision resulted in no statistical difference for HGCPa detection rates, while achieved a significant difference in reducing total and unnecessary biopsies. However, this difference was lower (better) for PCPTRC 2.0, being statistically significative when compared against PBCG thresholds. Both models were well calibrated (AUC 0.79) and achieved external validation compared with international cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study is the first to effectively validate both PCPTRC 2.0 and PBCG predictions for the Mexican population, proving that their use in daily practice improves biopsy decision making by accurately predicting HGPCa and limit unnecessary biopsies without representing additional costs to screening programs.

Does Shared Decision-Making for Prostate Cancer Screening Among African American Men Happen? It Depends on Who You Ask

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended for prostate cancer screening, but little is known about how this process is perceived by patients and providers. SDM is especially important for African American men, who are at high risk for the disease.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate agreement in SDM ratings among patients, providers, and objective observers.

METHOD

African American men ages 45-70 were recruited from primary care practices to participate in a study evaluating a decision aid (DA). Immediately after using the DA, patients proceeded to primary care appointments. Afterwards, patients and physicians completed surveys assessing perceptions about SDM. Clinical visits were also audio-recorded and coded to assess SDM.

RESULTS

Mean scores on SDM measures among patients were 73.2 (SD = 27.5, 95% CI 55.71-90.62), 83.1 among physicians (SD = 7.8 95% CI 78.14-88.06), and 67.1 among objective raters (SD = 36.8 95% CI 43.72-90.45). Among patient-provider dyads, mean agreement was 49.9%.

CONCLUSION

Patients, physicians, and objective observers perceived SDM differently. Understanding discordant experiences of SDM is vital for improving clinical guidance about SDM especially among African Americans who have historically faced healthcare discrimination and mistrust. DAs, particularly for African American men, should incorporate strategies to empower patients to advocate for their communication needs and preferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trials identifier number: NCT02787434.

Genetically Informed Prostate Cancer Screening

Prostate cancer represents a significant health care burden in the United States due to its incidence, treatment-related morbidity, and cancer-specific mortality. The burden begins with prostate-specific antigen screening, which has been subject to controversy due to concerns of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Advancements in molecular oncology have provided evidence for the inherited predisposition to prostate cancer, which could improve individualized, risk-adapted approaches to screening and mitigate the harms of routine screening. This review presents the current evidence for the genetic basis of prostate cancer and novel genetically informed, risk-adapted screening strategies for prostate cancer.

Association of Urinary MyProstateScore, Age, and Prostate Volume in a Longitudinal Cohort of Healthy Men: Long-term Findings from the Olmsted County Study

Background

Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA), used in prostate cancer screening, is nonspecific for cancer and is affected by age and prostate volume. More specific biomarkers could be more accurate for early detection of prostate cancer and reduce unnecessary prostate biopsies.

Objective

To evaluate the association of age and prostate volume with urinary MyProstateScore (MPS) in a screened, longitudinal cohort without evidence of prostate cancer.

Design setting and participants

The Olmsted County Study included men aged 40-79 yr who underwent biennial prostate cancer screening. PSA ≥4.0 ng/ml or abnormal rectal examination triggered prostate biopsy, and patients with cancer were excluded. The remaining men submitted urinary specimens for PCA3 and TMPRSS2:ERG testing.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

MPS was calculated using the validated, locked model for grade group ≥2 cancer that includes serum PSA, urinary PCA3, and urinary TMPRSS2:ERG. The associations of age and volume with biomarkers were assessed in multivariable regression models. The t statistic was used to quantify the strength of associations independent of the unit of measurement, and R ² values were used to estimate the proportion of biomarker variance explained by each factor.

Results and limitations

The study included 314 screened men without evidence of cancer. In multivariable models including age and volume, PCA3 score was significantly associated with age (t = 7.51; p < 0.001), while T2:ERG score was not associated with age or volume. MPS was significantly associated with both age (t = 7.45; p < 0.001) and volume (t = 3.56; p < 0.001), but accounting for age alone explained the variability observed (R ² = 0.29) in a similar way to the model including age and volume (R ² = 0.31). The variability of PCA3, T2:ERG, and MPS was less dependent on age and volume than the variability for PSA (R ² = 0.45).

Conclusions

In a cohort of longitudinally screened men without evidence of cancer, we found that MPS demonstrated less variability with noncancer factors (age, prostate volume) than PSA did. These findings support the biology of these markers as more cancer-specific than PSA and highlight their promise in reducing the morbidity associated with PSA-based screening.

Patient summary

In a group of men with no evidence of prostate cancer, we found that each of three urine-based markers of cancer-PCA3, T2:ERG, and the commercially available MyProstateScore test-showed less variability with noncancer factors (age and prostate volume) than serum PSA (prostate-specific antigen) did. These findings support their proposed use as noninvasive markers of prostate cancer that could improve the accuracy of early detection.

Impact on prostate cancer clinical presentation after non-screening policies at a tertiary-care medical center- a retrospective study

Background

In May 2012 the US Preventive Task Force issued a ‘D’ recommendation against routine PSA-based early detection of prostate cancer. This recommendation was implemented progressively in our health system. The aim of this study is to define its impact on prostate cancer staging at a tertiary care institution.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed from 2012 until 2015 at a single center. We analyzed the total number of biopsies performed per year and the positive biopsy rate. For those patients with positive biopsies we recorded diagnostic PSA, clinical stage, ISUP grade group, nodal involvement and metastatic status at diagnosis.

Results

A total of 1686 biopsies were analyzed. The positive biopsy rate increased from 25% in 2012 to 40% in 2015 (p < 0.05). No change in median PSA was noticed (p = 0.627). The biopsies detected higher ISUP grades (p = 0.000). In addition, newly diagnosed prostate cancer presented a higher clinical stage (p = 0.005), higher metastatic rates (p = 0.03) and a tendency to higher lymph node involvement although not statistically significant (p = 0.09).

Conclusion

After the 2012 recommendation, patients presented a higher probability of a prostate cancer diagnosis, with a more adverse ISUP group, clinical stage and metastatic disease.

These results should be taken into consideration to implement a risk adapted strategy for prostate cancer screening.

The Effectiveness of Shared Compared to Informed Decision Making for Prostate Cancer Screening in a High-Risk African American Population: A Randomized Control Trial

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer incidence and mortality in the United States in African Americans (AA) are higher than in Caucasians. Eastern Cuyahoga County in Ohio is majority AA and is considered an underserved population particularly vulnerable to healthcare disparities. There is a paucity of data about shared decision making among high-risk AA men with regard to prostate cancer screening. This study aims to examine shared versus informed decision making (SDM versus IDM) in a randomized, control trial among a large, high-risk AA population.

METHODS

Patients were included in annual one-day outreach events, each held over 3 years (2017-2019), and were randomized at each event into IDM (control) and SDM (investigational) groups and then were offered screening via prostate specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal exam (DRE). The primary endpoints were proportion of participants over 40 who did not demonstrate decisional conflict about prostate cancer screening measured by the SURE score, as well as change of knowledge score about prostate cancer screening.

RESULTS

Overall, 175 patients were enrolled in the trial; 79 in the SDM arm and 96 in the IDM arm. The investigational (SDM) arm had 3/79 (3.9%) conflict versus 6/96 (6.4%) in the control (IDM) arm (p = 0.74). With regard to knowledge improvement, the SDM cohort demonstrated improvement following educational tools for 66/79 (81%) of participants versus 76/96 (79%) in the IDM cohort (p = 0.85). There was no difference in the proportion (63%) of participants in either group who found the information very helpful (using a Likert scale).

CONCLUSIONS

Our education-based study showed no significant difference between SDM and IDM with regard to decisional conflict about prostate cancer screening. The study also demonstrated significant improvement in knowledge about prostate cancer screening in a high-risk AA population in both groups. Our results should be interpreted with caution due to several limitations; however, the study can serve as a benchmark for future studies in this very important topic.

Men's willingness to pay for prostate cancer screening: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to review studies on willingness to pay (WTP) for prostate cancer screening.

METHODS

This systematic-review was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines. By searching six-health-database, WTP studies on prostate cancer screening using contingent valuation method published in English until March 2020 were included and those with unavailable full-text and inadequate quality-assessment scores were excluded. Smith checklist was used for the quality assessment. Extracted WTPs were converted to US dollar in 2018 using exchange rate parity and net present value formula to make comparison. Factors' effect was assessed by vote counting.

RESULTS

Six final studies published after 2006 reported above 70% Smith checklist items needed to be considered in contingent valuation study reports. Seven factors have positive effects on WTP. The reported WTP value varied from 11$ to 588$ in Japan and Germany, respectively.

CONCLUSION

WTP for prostate cancer screening was positive among all studied men. The results of factors' effect assessment showed that better understanding prostate cancer risks or screening tests and factors such as age, income, family history of cancer, hospitalization history, and educational level have positive effects. Moreover, prostate-specific antigen history, health insurance, employment, and subject's health assessment received less attention. The results' generalization to all countries is not applicable because there are no studies for low- and middle-income countries.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020172789.

Examining the relationship between diabetes and prostate cancer through changes in screening guidelines

PURPOSE

Previous studies have found that men with diabetes are at reduced risk of prostate cancer compared to men without diabetes. The lower risk could be due to biologic differences and/or a diagnosis bias from use of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test as a screening and diagnostic tool. We sought to further examine the relationship between diabetes and incidence of prostate cancer and examine the potential impact of changes in PSA screening guidelines in 2008 and 2012.

METHODS

We used 2004-2015 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data and limited the study population to men aged 67-74 with at least 2 years of continuous enrollment. Using the 5% Medicare sample as the denominator and prostate cancer cases as the numerator, we calculated age-adjusted rate ratios (RR) in 2006-2011 and 2012-2015 by diabetes status, overall and by tumor grade. We used multivariable logistic regression to compare tumor characteristics by diabetes status.

RESULTS

Men with diabetes had lower incidence rates of prostate cancer compared to men without diabetes in 2006-2011 [RR = 0.89 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87-0.91] and 2012-2015 (RR = 0.92 95% CI 0.89-0.95) but the slight attenuation toward the null in 2012-2015 was primarily due to the change in RRs for low-grade tumors.

CONCLUSION

We found differences in the risk and characteristics of prostate cancer by diabetes status and that some risks have changed over time as guidelines have changed. With lower PSA use in the more recent time-period, rates of low-grade tumors have become more similar by diabetes status.

PSA-based machine learning model improves prostate cancer risk stratification in a screening population

CONTEXT

The majority of prostate cancer diagnoses are facilitated by testing serum Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) levels. Despite this, there are limitations to the diagnostic accuracy of PSA. Consideration of patient demographic factors and biochemical adjuncts to PSA may improve prostate cancer risk stratification. We aimed to develop a contemporary, accurate and cost-effective model based on objective measures to improve the accuracy of prostate cancer risk stratification.

METHODS

Data were collated from a local institution and combined with patient data retrieved from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer screening Trial (PLCO) database. Using a dataset of 4548 patients, a machine learning model was developed and trained using PSA, free-PSA, age and free-PSA to total PSA (FTR) ratio.

RESULTS

The model was trained on a dataset involving 3638 patients and was then tested on a separate set of 910 patients. The model improved prediction for prostate cancer (AUC 0.72) compared to PSA alone (AUC 0.63), age (AUC 0.52), free-PSA (AUC 0.50) and FTR alone (AUC 0.65). When an operating point is chosen such that the sensitivity of the model is 80% the specificity of the model is 45.3%. The benefit in AUC secondary to the model was related to sample size, with AUC of 0.64 observed when a subset of the cohort was assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

Development of a dense neural network model improved the diagnostic accuracy in screening for prostate cancer. These results demonstrate an additional utility of machine learning methods in prostate cancer risk stratification when using biochemical parameters.

Identification of genetic biomarkers in urine for early detection of prostate cancer

Prostate cancer screening is a challenging and vital issue in the aspects of the current tests and risk assessments. Prostate cancer risk assessments are currently carried out by using blood, urine and tissue biomarkers with radiological imaging methods. Here, we introduce a novel noninvasive screening tool for a further in-depth selection of eligible cases for prostate biopsies which is based on sequencing somatic and hereditary HOXB13 mutations in urine samples. This approach provides diagnostic information to the physician about the presence of prostate cancer while aiming to screen for specific prostate biopsies and save biopsies potentially when there are no mutations related to prostate cancer. Findings suggest that this method is reliable, cost-effective, and has a promising potential in prostate cancer screening.

The effect of information on prostate cancer screening decision process: a discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer screening is controversial because of uncertainty about its benefits and risks. The aim of this survey was to reveal preferences of men concerning prostate cancer screening and to test the effect of an informative video on these preferences.

METHODS

A stated preferences questionnaire was sent by e-mail to men aged 50-75 with no history of prostate cancer. Half of them were randomly assigned to view an informative video. A discrete choice model was established to reveal men's preferences for six prostate cancer screening characteristics: mortality by prostate cancer, number of false positive and false negative results, number of overdiagnosis, out-of-pocket costs and recommended frequency.

RESULTS

A population-based sample composed by 1024 men filled in the entire questionnaire. Each attribute gave the expected sign except for overdiagnosis. The video seemed to increase the intention to abstain from prostate cancer screening.

CONCLUSIONS

The participants attached greater importance to a decrease in the number of false negatives and a reduction in prostate cancer mortality than to other risks such as the number of false positives and overdiagnosis. Further research is needed to help men make an informed choice regarding screening.

Epistemic risks in cancer screening: Implications for ethics and policy

Cancer screening is the subject of much debate; while screening has the potential to save lives by identifying and treating cancers in early stages, it is also the case that not all cancers cause symptoms, and the diagnosis of these cancers can lead to unnecessary treatments and subsequent side-effects and complications. This paper explores the relationships between epistemic risks in cancer diagnosis and screening, the social organization of medical research and practice, and policy making; it does this by examining 2018 recommendations by the United States Preventative Services Task Force that patients make individualized, autonomy-based decisions about cancer screening on the basis of discussions with their physicians. While the paper focuses on prostate cancer screening, the issues that it raises are relevant to other cancer screening programs, especially breast cancer. The paper argues that prostate cancer screening-and, more generally, the process of risk assessment for prostate cancer-is pervaded by epistemic risks that reflect value judgments and that the pervasiveness of these epistemic risks creates significant and under-explored difficulties for physician-patient communication and the achievement of autonomous patient decision making.

Low Penetrance Germline Genetic Testing: Role for Risk Stratification in Prostate Cancer Screening and Examples From Clinical Practice

Broad-based prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening has saved lives but at a substantial human and financial cost. One way of mitigating this harm, while maintaining and possibly improving the benefit, is by focusing screening efforts on men at higher risk. With age, race, and family history as the only risk factors, many men lack any reliable data to inform their prostate cancer (PCa) screening decisions. Complexities including history of previous negative biopsies, interpretation of negative and/or equivocal mpMRI findings, and patient comorbidities further compound the already complicated decisions surrounding PCa screening and early detection. The authors present cases that provide real-world examples of how a single nucleotide polymorphism-based test can provide patients and providers with personalized PCa risk assessments and allow for development of improved risk-stratified screening regimens.

Primary Care Providers' Intended Use of Decision Aids for Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing for Prostate Cancer Screening

Decision aids are tools intended to help people weigh the benefits and harms of a health decision. We examined primary care providers' perspective on use of decision aids and explored whether providers' beliefs and interest in use of a decision aid was associated with offering the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test for early detection of prostate cancer. Data were obtained from 2016 DocStyles, an annual, web-based survey of U.S. healthcare professionals including primary care physicians (n = 1003) and nurse practitioners (n = 253). We found that the majority of primary care providers reported not using (patient) decision aids for prostate cancer screening, but were interested in learning about and incorporating these tools in their practice. Given the potential of decision aids to guide in informed decision-making, there is an opportunity for evaluating existing decision aids for prostate cancer screening for clinical use.

Informed decision-making based on a leaflet in the context of prostate cancer screening

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess to what extent men make informed choices in the context of prostate cancer screening and how written material contributes to that process.

METHODS

We developed a leaflet describing prostate cancer screening, and a questionnaire consisting of knowledge, attitude, and intended screening uptake components to assess informed decision-making. The leaflet and questionnaire were pilot-tested among men of the target population, adapted accordingly, and sent to 761 members of an online research panel. We operationalized whether the leaflet was read as spending one minute on the leaflet page and by a self-reported answer of respondents.

RESULTS

The response rate was 66% (501/761). The group who read the leaflet (n = 342) correctly answered a knowledge item significantly more often (10.9 versus 8.8; p < 0.001) than those who did not read the leaflet (n = 159), and made more informed choices (73% versus 56%; p = 0.001). There were no significant differences in attitude and intended screening uptake between both groups.

CONCLUSION

Having read the leaflet could be one of the factors associated with increased levels of knowledge and informed decision-making.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

The results of this study showed that increasing knowledge and supporting informed decision-making with written material are feasible in prostate cancer screening.

Amperometric sarcosine biosensor with strong anti-interference capabilities based on mesoporous organic-inorganic hybrid materials

Amperometric enzyme biosensors are some of the simplest and cheapest types of medical devices used in the rapid detection of biomarkers that have been developed in the past fifty years. When the concentrations of biomarkers are at micromoles per liter, such as for sarcosine, which was recently discovered as a biomarker for prostate cancer, the response signal of the interferences is huge, and the biosensor is hard to satisfy the requirements of practical applications. In this manuscript, we describe a strategy for synthesizing a surface electronegative organic-inorganic hybrid mesoporous material, which could reduce the interference signal much better than Nafion and Chitosan. We verify that the surface potential of the carrier nanomaterial plays an important role in excluding anionic interferences. We also prepare a sensitive (16.35 μA mM^-1), low LOD (0.13 μM) and wide linear range (1-70 μM) amperometric sarcosine biosensor with excellent anti-interference properties. This mesoporous material provides a bio-composite platform for the development of simple amperometric biosensors for detecting micromoles per liter of analytes in serum or urine.

Prostate Cancer Screening

Whether to screen for prostate cancer in aging men is a topic that is fairly well researched, but recommendations are controversial, because the evidence supporting any recommendation is equivocal. The evidence clearly does not support routine screening of all average-risk men, but for men aged 55 to 69 years, either not routinely screening, or engaging each man in shared decision making for his individual preference on screening, is reasonable and consistent with the evidence. Many organizations, including the American Cancer Society, have not yet reassessed their guidelines, in response to the US Preventative Services Task Force revised guideline.

Evidence-based approach to active surveillance of prostate cancer

Active surveillance is a good management option for some men with non-metastatic prostate cancer. In this review, we examine the evidence for several topics related to active surveillance. We examine: (1) which patients should be eligible for active surveillance, (2) what follow-up (monitoring) protocols should be used for men on surveillance, (3) what is the role of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for men on surveillance, and (4) what is the prognosis for men who choose surveillance compared to radical treatment. In many instances, the evidence is evolving or lacking. In these situations, we highlight the limitations of the data.

Prostate Cancer Screening Guidelines for African American Veterans: A New Perspective

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is the most common form of cancer, other than skin cancers, in American men and the second leading cause of cancer deaths. In 2012, the US Preventative Task Force recommended against the prostate specific antigen-based screening for prostate cancer, regardless of race or age, due to overtreatment of low-risk disease and lack of impact on disease outcomes. In African-American men, however, the incidence of prostate cancer is almost 60% higher and the mortality rate is two- to three-times greater than that of Caucasian men. In the subpopulation of African-American veterans, many have been exposed to chemicals that increase incidence of high-risk prostate cancer. The yearly total number of veterans with prostate cancer based on quantification is 3471.9, and the total number of annual prostate cancer deaths is 556. Considering these facts, we examine whether or not it is appropriate to screen African-American veteran males for prostate cancer. Previously, we reviewed data on African-Americans in the general population. We concluded that new guidelines needed to be implemented for screening African-Americans. Here we review the pertinent issues related to African-American veterans.

METHODS

We performed a PubMed and Google Scholar search using the keywords: African-American veteran, prostate cancer, mortality, PSA density, molecular markers, and Agent Orange. The articles that were relevant to the clinical, molecular, social, and health policy aspects of the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer in African-American veterans were analyzed. The data was then summarized.

RESULTS

After surveying the literature, we found several areas where the African-American veteran population differed from their Caucasian counterparts. These areas were incidence, clinical course, social differences, PSA levels, mortality rate, and molecular markers. A subset of the veteran population was also exposed to Agent Orange, which has been shown to increase the incidence of aggressive forms of prostate cancer. Lastly, the current USPTF guidelines recommending against prostate cancer screening were based on patient cohorts containing disproportionately low numbers of African-Americans, limiting their extension to the African-American veteran population.

CONCLUSION

After reviewing and summarizing the literature, we contend that a need exists to develop and implement more targeted prostate cancer screening guidelines for African-American veterans.

A collaborative computer aided diagnosis (C-CAD) system with eye-tracking, sparse attentional model, and deep learning

Computer aided diagnosis (CAD) tools help radiologists to reduce diagnostic errors such as missing tumors and misdiagnosis. Vision researchers have been analyzing behaviors of radiologists during screening to understand how and why they miss tumors or misdiagnose. In this regard, eye-trackers have been instrumental in understanding visual search processes of radiologists. However, most relevant studies in this aspect are not compatible with realistic radiology reading rooms. In this study, we aim to develop a paradigm shifting CAD system, called collaborative CAD (C-CAD), that unifies CAD and eye-tracking systems in realistic radiology room settings. We first developed an eye-tracking interface providing radiologists with a real radiology reading room experience. Second, we propose a novel algorithm that unifies eye-tracking data and a CAD system. Specifically, we present a new graph based clustering and sparsification algorithm to transform eye-tracking data (gaze) into a graph model to interpret gaze patterns quantitatively and qualitatively. The proposed C-CAD collaborates with radiologists via eye-tracking technology and helps them to improve their diagnostic decisions. The C-CAD uses radiologists' search efficiency by processing their gaze patterns. Furthermore, the C-CAD incorporates a deep learning algorithm in a newly designed multi-task learning platform to segment and diagnose suspicious areas simultaneously. The proposed C-CAD system has been tested in a lung cancer screening experiment with multiple radiologists, reading low dose chest CTs. Promising results support the efficiency, accuracy and applicability of the proposed C-CAD system in a real radiology room setting. We have also shown that our framework is generalizable to more complex applications such as prostate cancer screening with multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI).

Changes in the outcome of prostate biopsies after preventive task force recommendation against prostate-specific antigen screening

Background

The benefits of PSA-based screening for prostate cancer (PCa) are controversial. The Canadian and American Task Forces on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC & USPSTF) have released recommendations against the use of routine PSA-based screening for any men. We thought to assess the impact of these recommendations on the outcomes and trends of prostate needle biopsies.

Methods

A complete chart review was conducted for all men who received prostate needle biopsies at McGill University Health Center between 2010 and 2016. Of those, we included 1425 patients diagnosed with PCa for analysis. We Compared 2 groups of patients (pre and post recommendations’ release date) using Welch’s t-tests and Chi-square test. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to analyze variables predicting worse pathological outcomes.

Results

When the release date of the USPSTF draft (October 2011) was used as a cut-off, we found an average annual decrease of 10.6% in the total number of biopsies. The median (IQR) baseline PSA levels were higher in post-recommendations group (n = 977) when compared to pre-recommendations group (n = 448) [8 ng/ml (5.7–12.9) versus 6.4 ng/ml (4.9–10.1), respectively. P = 0.0007]. Also, post-recommendations group’s patients had higher Gleason score (G7: 35.4% versus 28.4% and G8-G10: 31.2% versus 18.1%, respectively. P < 0.0001). Moreover, they had higher intermediate and high-risk PCa classification (36.4% versus 32.8% and 35.5% versus 22.1%, respectively. P < 0.0001). The recommendations release date was an independent variable associated with higher Gleason score in prostate biopsies (OR: 2.006, 95%CI: 1.477–2.725). Using the CTFPHC recommendations release date (October 2014) as a cut-off in further analysis, revealed similar results.

Conclusions

Our results revealed a reduction in the number of prostate needle biopsies performed over time after the recommendations of the preventive task forces. Furthermore, it showed a significant relative increase in the higher risk PCa diagnosis. The oncological outcomes associated with this trend need to be examined in further studies.

The relationship between diabetes, prostate-specific antigen screening tests, and prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Men with diabetes have been found to have a reduced risk of prostate cancer (PCa), potentially due to detection bias from lower prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels or inhibition of tumor growth. Understanding if lower PCa rates are due to a lower risk of the disease or a detection bias from PSA testing can help inform the benefits and harms from prostate cancer screening.

METHODS

We used data from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Screening Trial to assess the impact of PSA screening on PCa in men with diabetes and the potential role of detection bias and/or slower tumor growth. Comparing men by diabetes status, we calculated age-adjusted incidence rates by tumor grade and compared screening results, PSA levels, and tumor characteristics.

RESULTS

Men with diabetes had lower rates of PCa but was limited to low- and intermediate-grade tumors. Men with diabetes were less likely to be biopsied after their first positive screening test and men diagnosed with low/intermediate-grade tumors had significantly more advanced tumors with higher PSA levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide additional evidence that detection bias is likely contributing to the lower rates of low- and intermediate-grade prostate cancers.

Patient and Physician Factors Associated with Undisclosed Prostate Cancer Screening in a Sample of Predominantly Immigrant Black Men

Medical guidelines do not recommend prostate cancer screening, particularly without informed and shared decision making. This study investigates undisclosed opportunistic screening using prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing in black immigrant and African American men. Participants (N = 142) were insured urban men, 45- to 70-years old. Patients' reports of testing were compared with medical claims to assess undisclosed PSA testing. Most (94.4 %) men preferred to share in screening decisions, but few (46.5 %) were aware PSA testing was performed. Four factors predicted being unaware of testing: low formal education, low knowledge about prostate cancer, no intention to screen, and no physician recommendation (all p's < .05). Undisclosed PSA testing was common. Both patient and provider factors increased risk of being uninformed about prostate cancer screening. Interventions combining patient education and physician engagement in shared decision making may better align practice with current prostate cancer screening guidelines.

Prostate cancer screening: what can we learn from randomised trials?

In this article, the principle of randomised trials are first described and then prostate cancer screening trials published to date are evaluated based on these principles. A summary of the randomised prostate cancer screening is provided. The conclusion that can be made from the results of the screening trials, as well as limitations of the evidence and open questions are outlined in the end.

High rates of cancer screening among dialysis patients seen in primary care a cohort study

Routine preventive cancer screening is not recommended for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD)1 due to their limited life expectancy. The current extent of cancer screening in this population is unknown. Primary care (PC) reminder systems or performance incentives may encourage indiscriminate cancer screening. We compared rates of cancer screening in patients with ESRD, with and without PC visits. This is a retrospective cohort study using United States Renal Data System (USRDS) billing data and electronic medical record data. Patients aged ≥18 years starting dialysis from 2001 to 2008, Midwest regional dialysis network were categorized with or without a PC visit (defined as an office visit in family practice, internal medicine, pediatrics, geriatrics or preventive medicine during the first two years of dialysis). Cancer screening was based on Current Procedural Terminology codes in USRDS. We identified 2512 incident dialysis patients (60% men, median age 65y). Cancer screening rates were more frequent among those seen in PC: 38% vs 19% (P = 0.0002), for breast; 18% vs 10% (P = 0.047) for cervical; 13% versus 8% (P = 0.024) for prostate; and 18% vs 9% (P = 0.0002) for colon cancer. Multivariable analyses found that those with PC were more likely to be screened after adjusting for age, sex, and comorbidities.

In our practice, cancer screening rates among chronic dialysis patients are lower than those previously reported for our general population (64% for breast cancer). However, a sizeable proportion of our ESRD population does receive cancer screening, especially those still seen in primary care.

•

Dialysis patients have relatively high rates of cancer screening.

•

Patients seen in primary care were more likely to get breast and colon ca screening.

•

Half of women over age 65 received breast cancer screening within two years.

Prostate Cancer Screening

During the prostate-specific antigen-based prostate cancer (PCa) screening era there has been a 53% decrease in the US PCa mortality rate. Concerns about overdiagnosis and overtreatment combined with misinterpretation of clinical trial data led to a recommendation against PCa screening, resulting in a subsequent reversion to more high-risk disease at diagnosis. Re-evaluation of trial data and increasing acceptance of active surveillance led to a new draft recommendation for shared decision making for men aged 55 to 69 years old. Further consideration is needed for more intensive screening in men with high-risk factors. PCa screening significantly reduces PCa morbidity and mortality.

The Stockholm-3 Model for Prostate Cancer Detection: Algorithm Update, Biomarker Contribution, and Reflex Test Potential

BACKGROUND

It has been shown that the Stockholm-3 model (S3M) outperforms prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a screening tool for prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To update the S3M, to give a detailed account of the value of each predictor in the S3M, and to evaluate the S3M as a reflex test for men with PSA ≥3ng/ml.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

During 2012-2015, the Stockholm-3 study evaluated the S3M relative to PSA as tests for Gleason score ≥7 prostate cancers among men aged 50-69 yr. The participants (n=59 159) underwent both tests, and biopsy was recommended if at least one was positive. A total of 5073 men had a biopsy because of elevated PSA (≥3ng/ml).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Logistic regression was used to update the S3M: intact PSA was removed, HOXB13 was included, and the model was fitted to data from the Stockholm-3 training and validation cohorts. To compare S3M with PSA, we fixed the sensitivity for detection of high-grade cancer and evaluated the performance as the number of biopsies needed to achieve that sensitivity for each test.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The updated S3M slightly improved the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve compared to previously published results (0.75 vs 0.74). When used as a reflex test for men with PSA ≥3ng/ml, S3M reduced the number of biopsies needed by 34% compared to the use of PSA alone, with equal sensitivity. A limitation is the ethnically homogeneous population.

CONCLUSIONS

A major problem with PSA screening-too many unnecessary biopsies-can be mitigated if S3M is used as a reflex test.

PATIENT SUMMARY

To find aggressive prostate cancer with the minimum number of negative biopsies and detection of clinically insignificant cancers, we evaluated the use of a personalized diagnostic prediction model as a second test for men with a positive prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. We found that this two-step approach could reduce prostate biopsies by a third compared to using PSA alone.

Focal Ablation of Prostate Cancer

The challenge to the urology community is to reduce the risks of screening and treatment by reducing the number of men undergoing unnecessary biopsy and whole-gland curative treatment of low-risk disease. There is compelling evidence that focal ablation of prostate cancer is truly minimally invasive and offers major functional advantages over whole-gland treatment.

Prostate-specific antigen screening: An update of physician beliefs and practices

PSA testing for early detection of prostate cancer decreased dramatically following the 2012 PSA screening recommendation against routine screening of asymptomatic men. In an assessment of the screening behaviors of primary care providers, the majority (61%) of family medicine and internal medicine practitioners who responded to a 2016 DocStyles online survey (608 of 1003) recommended prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing based on individual risk or other factors, rather than routinely screening all men for prostate cancer.

Revisiting Prostate Cancer Screening Practices Among Vermont Primary Care Physicians

The objective of this study was to assess the prostate cancer screening practices of Vermont primary care physicians and compare them with a prior study in 2001. An electronic survey was created and emailed to all currently practicing primary care physicians in Vermont. Data was stratified by practice length, practice location, university affiliation, and internal medicine versus family practice. Surveys were received from 123 (27.2%) primary care physicians. 27.7% of physicians in practice <10 years recommended prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing, compared with 55.9% of those practicing ≥10 years (p = 0.006). Of those who modified their recommendations in the past 5 years, 96.1% reported that the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2012 statement influenced them. Respondents who continued to use PSA testing were less likely to stop screening after age 80 compared with those surveyed in 2001 (51% in 2014 vs. 74% in 2001; p <0.001). Primary care physicians in practice for 10 or more years were more likely to recommend PSA-based screening than those in practice for less time. The USPSTF statement discouraging PSA-based screening for prostate cancer has had significant penetrance among Vermont primary care physicians.

Prostate cancer screening decision-making in three states: 2013 behavioral risk factor surveillance system analysis

INTRODUCTION

Given the discordant prostate cancer screening recommendations in the United States, shared decision-making (SDM) has become increasingly important. The objectives of this study were to determine who made the final decision to obtain prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening and identify factors associated with the screening decision made by both patients and their health care providers.

METHODS

Using the 2013 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data from Delaware, Hawaii, and Massachusetts, we calculated weighted percentages of SDM. Associations between the SDM and sociodemographic, lifestyle, access to care, and PSA testing-related factors were assessed using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

There were 2,248 men aged 40 years or older who ever had a PSA-based screening in these three states. Only 36% of them made their prostate cancer screening decision jointly with their health care provider. Multivariate analyses showed that men who were married/living together or had a college degree and above were more likely to report having SDM than men who were never married or had less than high school education (P = 0.02 and 0.002). Moreover, men whose most recent PSA test occurred within the past year were more likely to report SDM than men who had the test done more than 2 years ago (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of screening decisions were made by the patient or health care provider alone in these three states, not jointly, as recommended. Our study points to the need to promote SDM among patients and their health care providers before PSA testing.

Investigating the prostate specific antigen, body mass index and age relationship: is an age-BMI-adjusted PSA model clinically useful?

PURPOSE

Previous studies indicate a possible inverse relationship between prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and body mass index (BMI), and a positive relationship between PSA and age. We investigated the associations between age, BMI, PSA, and screen-detected prostate cancer to determine whether an age-BMI-adjusted PSA model would be clinically useful for detecting prostate cancer.

METHODS

Cross-sectional analysis nested within the UK ProtecT trial of treatments for localized cancer. Of 18,238 men aged 50-69 years, 9,457 men without screen-detected prostate cancer (controls) and 1,836 men with prostate cancer (cases) met inclusion criteria: no history of prostate cancer or diabetes; PSA < 10 ng/ml; BMI between 15 and 50 kg/m2. Multivariable linear regression models were used to investigate the relationship between log-PSA, age, and BMI in all men, controlling for prostate cancer status.

RESULTS

In the 11,293 included men, the median PSA was 1.2 ng/ml (IQR: 0.7-2.6); mean age 61.7 years (SD 4.9); and mean BMI 26.8 kg/m2 (SD 3.7). There were a 5.1% decrease in PSA per 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI (95% CI 3.4-6.8) and a 13.6% increase in PSA per 5-year increase in age (95% CI 12.0-15.1). Interaction tests showed no evidence for different associations between age, BMI, and PSA in men above and below 3.0 ng/ml (all p for interaction >0.2). The age-BMI-adjusted PSA model performed as well as an age-adjusted model based on National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines at detecting prostate cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Age and BMI were associated with small changes in PSA. An age-BMI-adjusted PSA model is no more clinically useful for detecting prostate cancer than current NICE guidelines. Future studies looking at the effect of different variables on PSA, independent of their effect on prostate cancer, may improve the discrimination of PSA for prostate cancer.

Do Men Receive Information Required for Shared Decision Making About PSA Testing? Results from a National Survey

Most professional organizations, including the American College of Physicians and U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, emphasize that screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test should only occur after a detailed discussion between the health-care provider and patient about the known risks and potential benefits of the test. In fact, guidelines strongly advise health-care providers to involve patients, particularly those at elevated risk of prostate cancer, in a "shared decision making" (SDM) process about PSA testing. We analyzed data from the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey 2011-2012-a nationally representative, cross-sectional survey-to examine the extent to which health professionals provided men with information critical to SDM prior to PSA testing, including (1) that patients had a choice about whether or not to undergo PSA testing, (2) that not all doctors recommend PSA testing, and (3) that no one is sure if PSA testing saves lives. Over half (55 %) of men between the ages of 50 and 74 reported ever having had a PSA test. However, only 10 % of men, regardless of screening status, reported receiving all three pieces of information: 55 % reported being informed that they could choose whether or not to undergo testing, 22 % reported being informed that some doctors recommend PSA testing and others do not, and 14 % reported being informed that no one is sure if PSA testing actually saves lives. Black men and men with lower levels of education were less likely to be provided this information. There is a need to improve patient-provider communication about the uncertainties associated with the PSA test. Interventions directed at patients, providers, and practice settings should be considered.