A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Smarter screening for prostate cancer. | LitMetric

Smarter screening for prostate cancer.

World J Urol

University Health Network-Toronto General Hospital and Princess Margaret Cancer Center, Division of Urology, University of Toronto, 610 University Avenue, 3-130, Toronto, ON, M6G 2M9, Canada.

Published: June 2019

Purpose: Prostate cancer is the second commonest cancer among men. In the large European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening has been shown to substantially reduce prostate cancer mortality. However, PSA screening is known to lead to more unnecessary prostate biopsies and over-diagnosis of clinically insignificant cancer. Therefore, it is imperative that smarter screening methods be developed to overcome the weaknesses of PSA screening. This review explores the novel screening tools that are available.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed regarding newer biomarkers, imaging techniques and risk-predicting models that are used to screen for prostate cancer in mainly biopsy-naïve men.

Results: Novel serum-based models like 4Kscore and prostate health index (PHI) are generally better than PSA alone in detecting clinically significant cancer. Similarly, urine-based biomarkers like prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) and HOXC6/DLX1 have been shown to be more accurate than PSA screening. More recently, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is gaining popularity for its ability to detect clinically significant cancer. There is also evidence that combining individual tests to develop prediction models can reliably predict high-risk prostate cancers while reducing the number of unnecessary biopsies. Combinations such as the Stockholm-3 model (STHLM3) and other novel combinations are presented in this review.

Conclusion: While we continue to find the smarter screening methods that are reliable, precise, and cost-effective, we continue to advocate shared decision-making in prostate cancer screening in order to work in our patients' best interests.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02719-5DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

prostate cancer
28
psa screening
16
smarter screening
12
cancer
11
prostate
10
screening
9
screening prostate
8
screening methods
8
clinically cancer
8
psa
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!