SCREENING OF PROSTATE CANCER BASED ON COMBINED TOTAL PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN AND DIGITAL RECTAL EXAM

Diep Bao Tuan1, Vo Ngoc Cuong2, Nguyen Truong Vien3, Vu Khanh Linh4, Nguyen Chi Cuong5
1 Oncology Hospital, Ho Chi Minh City
2 Binh Chanh General Hospital, Ho Chi Minh City
3 Pham Ngoc Thach University of Medicine, Ho Chi Minh City
4 University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City
5 Hoa Hao Medical Center, Ho Chi Minh City

Main Article Content

Abstract

Introduction: Screening using total Prostate-Specific antigen (tPSA) or digital rectal exam (DRE) to determine referral for biopsy is a crucial requirement in prostate cancer diagnosis. However, abnormality criteria of tPSA and DRE are often applied in isolation.


Objective: This study aimed to estimate the probability of prostate cancer based on combined tPSA and DRE.


Methods: The study was conducted at MEDIC Hoa Hao Medical Center, Ho Chi Minh City, from January 2020 to April 2023 with a cross-sectional design. A total of 583 patient records aged ≥50 years with complete DRE, tPSA, and biopsy results were conveniently and continuously selected. Variables were exported from the records to data.


Resutls: Results confirmed that nodular abnormalities and increased tissue density on DRE and tPSA elevation are independent factors associated with prostate cancer. All groups with prostate nodules detected by DRE had a high probability of prostate cancer (over 80%). Notably, patients without nodular abnormalities but presenting with a rigid prostate on DRE and tPSA levels >20 ng/ml had a 100% probability of prostate cancer. In contrast, patients with normal DRE findings had a prostate cancer detection rate of <25%.


Conclusion: These findings indicate that the probability of prostate cancer is substantially influenced by the combined interpretation of DRE characteristics and tPSA levels. Integrating these variables may improve clinical decision-making regarding surveillance, further diagnostic evaluation, and biopsy referral.

Article Details

References

1. Sighinolfi, Rocco. EAU Guidelines: Prostate Cancer 2019. Eur Urol. Dec 2019;76(6):871. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2019.07.014
2. Wang L, Lu B, He M, Wang Y, Wang Z, Du L. Prostate Cancer Incidence and Mortality: Global Status and Temporal Trends in 89 Countries From 2000 to 2019. Front Public Health. 2022;10:811044. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.811044
3. American Cancer Society. Prostate cancer: Early Detection, Diagnosis, and Staging. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/prostate-cancer/detection-diagnosis-staging/, Accessed access on 27Feb2021.
4. Hội Tiết Niệu và Thận học Việt Nam. Phác đồ hướng dẫn chẩn đoán và điều trị ung thư tuyến tiền liệt. 2020;
5. Loeb S, Eastham JA. Diagnosis and Staging of Prostate Cancer. In: Elsevier, ed. Campbell-Walsh Urology. 2016:p. 2601-2608.
6. Aladwani M, Lophatananon A, Ollier W, Muir K. Prediction models for prostate cancer to be used in the primary care setting: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2020;
7. Kanagaraju V, Ashlyin PVK, Elango N, Devanand B. Role of Transrectal Ultrasound Elastography in the Diagnosis of Prostate Carcinoma. J Med Ultrasound. Jul-Sep 2020;28(3):173-178. doi:10.4103/jmu.Jmu_108_19
8. Gosselaar, C.Roobol MJ, Roemeling ea. The role of the digital rectal examination in subsequent screening visits in the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer (ERSPC). European urology. 2008;54(3):p. 581-8.
9. Mottet N., Bellmunt J., Bolla M., et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. European urology. Apr 2017;71(4):618-629. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.003
10. Morgan TM, Palapattu GS, Partin AW, et al.. Prostate Cancer Tumor Markers.