The discoveries and application of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) have been much appreciated because PSA-based screening has saved millions of lives of prostate cancer (PCa) patients. Historically speaking, Flocks et al first identified antigenic properties in prostate tissue in 1960. Then, Barnes et al detected immunologic characteristics in prostatic fluid in 1963. Hara et al characterized γ-semino-protein in semen in 1966, and it has been proven to be identical to PSA. Subsequently, Ablin et al independently reported the presence of precipitation antigens in the prostate in 1970. Wang et al purified the PSA in 1979, and Kuriyama et al first applied an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for PSA in 1980. However, the positive predictive value with a cutoff figure of 4.0 ng/mL appeared substantially low (∼30%). There are overdiagnoses and overtreatments for latent/low-risk PCa. Controversies exist in the PCa mortality-reducing effects of PSA screening between the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and the US Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial. For optimizing PCa screening, PSA-related items may require the following: 1) adjustment of the cutoff values according to age, as well as setting limits to age and screening intervals; 2) improving test performance using doubling time, density, and ratio of free: total PSA; and 3) fostering active surveillance for low-risk PCa with monitoring by PSA value. Other items needing consideration may include the following: 1) examinations of cell proliferation and cell cycle markers in biopsy specimens; 2) independent quantification of Gleason grading; 3) developing ethnicity-specific staging nomograms based on tumor stage, PSA value, and Gleason score; 4) delineation of the natural history; 5) revisiting the significance of the androgen/testosterone hypothesis; and 6) devoting special attention to individuals with a certain genetic predisposition. Finally, considering the uncertainty that exists in medicine, risk communication on PSA-based screening is indeed due.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4869637 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S98326 | DOI Listing |
Urologie
January 2025
Klinik für Urologie, Campus Lübeck, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Deutschland.
This article provides a comprehensive overview of the current treatment options for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) following the failure of first-line therapy. Although significant progress has been made in the primary treatment of hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, the management of mCRPC remains a clinical challenge. The article outlines the diagnostic criteria for mCRPC, which can be confirmed through biochemical progression and imaging techniques.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFUrologie
January 2025
Klinik für Urologie, Uro-Onkologie, roboter-assistierte und spezielle urologische Chirurgie, Uniklinik Köln, Kerpener Str. 62, 50927, Köln, Deutschland.
Introduction: Prostate cancer guidelines recommend molecular analysis of biomaterial following resistance to first-line systemic therapy in order to identify druggable mutations. We report on our results of molecular analysis of tissue specimens via next generation sequencing (NGS) in men with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).
Patients And Methods: In all, 311 mCRPC patients underwent NGS analysis from biopsy samples of progressive metastatic lesions or archival radical prostatectomy specimens.
Radiol Imaging Cancer
January 2025
From the Department of Radiology (A.C., A.N.Y., R.E., C.H., G.L., M.M., E.B.J., A.L.C., B.G., G.S.K., A.O.), Sanford J. Grossman Center of Excellence in Prostate Imaging and Image Guided Therapy (A.C., A.N.Y., M.M., A.L.C., B.G.), Department of Surgery, Section of Urology (G.G., L.F.R., P.K.M., S.E.), Department of Pathology (T.A.), and Department of Public Health Sciences (M.G.), University of Chicago, 5841 S Maryland Ave, MC 2026, Chicago, IL 60637.
Purpose To evaluate the use of an automated hybrid multidimensional MRI (HM-MRI)-based tool to prospectively identify prostate cancer targets before MRI/US fusion biopsy in comparison with Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System (PI-RADS)-based multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) evaluation by expert radiologists. Materials and Methods In this prospective clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov registration no.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInt J Urol
January 2025
Department of Urology, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, Gunma, Japan.
Cancer Rep (Hoboken)
January 2025
Uro-Oncology Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Background: Current approach to clinically suspicious biopsy-naïve men consists performing prostate MRI, followed by combined systematic (TRUS-Bx) and MRI-Ultrasound fusion biopsy (MRI-TBx) in those with PIRADS score ≥ 3. Researchers have attempted to determine who benefits from each biopsy method, but the results do not support the safe use of one method alone. This study aims to determine the optimal approach in biopsy-naïve men, according to their PSA levels.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!