PCRI Statement on Annual
Testing for PC (The Basics)
The Prostate Cancer Research Institute (PCRI) strongly supports annual testing
for the early detection of prostate cancer. Effective testing combines
both a prostate specific antigen (PSA) blood test and a digital
rectal exam (DRE) for men, beginning at:
- Age 35 – for those have a family history
of prostate cancer or who are of African American descent.
- Age 40 – for all other men.
It is important to note that even elevated PSA levels
may indicate the presence of very treatable urinary conditions,
such as benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) or prostatitis, and
do not necessarily indicate that cancer is present in the prostate. |
Recent studies published by the New
England Journal of Medicine have
increased the controversy as to how PSA
test results should be evaluated and
used. Many experts now suggest that a
PSA score of 2.5 nanograms per milliliter
(ng/ml) (rather than the current recommendation
of 4.0 ng/ml) should be the
point at which a doctor considers ordering
a biopsy. Other experts disagree,
contending that the 4.0 level already
results in what they deem to be too
many unnecessary biopsies.
The PCRI suggests that the issue is much
more complex than simply changing one
threshold and using it as an automatic trigger
for biopsying men. The following view on a
comprehensive approach to testing for prostate
cancer was developed by the PCRI staff after a
careful review of the literature and was reviewed
by members of the PCRI Medical Advisory Board.
It was created to help the public understand the
importance of regularly monitoring PSA levels
in order to accurately detect the presence of
prostate cancer (PC), or other conditions such as
prostatitis or benign prostatic hyperplasia
(BPH), which are normally less serious.
Details on Testing for PC
Effective testing for PC combines both a PSA
blood test and a DRE. Hence, prior to having
blood drawn for the PSA test, men should take
into consideration some of the factors that
might cause a variance in the PSA level.
This will help men improve their understanding
of their PSA values and DRE results, and
promote better communication with their
physician. Additionally, men are encouraged
to be vigilant about getting photocopies of
their PSA test results, and also to become
familiar with the factors that contribute to
being at high-risk for prostate cancer.
- Though the following factors may not
alter the overall PSA level significantly,
they may affect PSA rate of increase (PSAV)
and PSA doubling-time (PSADT) calculations.
(These calculations, and their
importance, are explained later.)
Factors that may alter a PSA level
include (but are not limited to):
• Digital rectal exam
(DRE). May elevate PSA level. The duration of elevation
may vary, but has been reported
to be at least 24 hours in some men. It is recommended that the DRE be
performed after blood is drawn for the
PSA test in order to obtain an accurate
PSA reading.
• Sexual activity. Ejaculation may elevate
PSA level for 24 to 48 hours.
• Different labs or assays use different
machines that can produce variable PSA
results from the same blood sample.
• Cystoscopy and/or catheterization.
Can elevate PSA level for at least two
weeks.
• Acute urinary retention. Can elevate
PSA for up to two weeks.
• Prostate biopsy or TURP (transurethral resection of the prostate).
Can elevate PSA level significantly for
up to six weeks.
•
5-alpha reductase medications such
as Proscar® (finasteride) or Avodart® (dutasteride) can
cause a reduction in PSA level of about 50%.
- Men (or their advocates) are strongly
encouraged to maintain a log of results
and keep photocopies of all reports
in order to easily monitor the exact dates
and results of their PSA levels and assay
and any subsequent pathology reports.
- Men are encouraged to know
the risk factors for PC and to understand testing for
PC in the context of those factors. Research
has shown that patients who make
informed testing decisions usually benefit
from the results.
Reported high-risk factors for PC
include (but are not limited to):
• Being of African American
descent.
• A family history of prostate cancer, especially in brothers.
• A diet high in saturated fats and red
meat.
• Occupations that involve use of
pesticides and other chemicals.
- While PSA is a significant indicator in the
diagnosis of most forms of PC, there are
some extremely aggressive varieties that
produce only a small amount of PSA. For this reason, PCRI recommends that
the DRE as well as the PSA test be done as
part of the annual exams.
- There is a small minority of patients who
present with disease at an earlier age than
indicated by these screening guidelines. Patients are encouraged to research their
particular situation and pursue testing for
PC, if so desired. Any presentation of urinary
symptoms (frequency, hesitation,
dribbling, pain, incomplete emptying)
should be investigated for possible BPH,
prostatitis, or PC.
Making the Decision to
Biopsy
It has been estimated that only 25-35% of
prostate biopsies each year in the U.S. find PC.
Hence, since prostate biopsies involve excising
cores of tissue from the prostate with needles
inserted through the rectum, they should not be
performed unless there is a persuasive indication
that cancer may be present. One such indication
is an abnormal DRE (a nodule, hardness, or other irregularity).
This, with or
without an elevated PSA level, may warrant
the need for a biopsy.
The standard for an elevated PSA has until
recently been a PSA level of 4.0 ng/ml. However,
there is a growing body of research to support
that lowering the threshold of the PSA level to
2.5 ng/ml will significantly increase prostate
cancer detection. However, it may also increase
the proportion of “unnecessary” biopsies.
Prior to taking a PSA test, it should be
understood that the PSA test measures an individual’s
prostate-specific antigen level, and is
not a prostate-CANCER-specific antigen level.
Hence, an elevated PSA level can indicate prostatitis
(inflamed prostate), BPH (non-malignant
enlarged prostate), or prostate cancer.
Both prostatitis and BPH are conditions, not
diseases, that are usually more easily treated, yet
whose symptoms may be similar to those of
cancer. Therefore, a needle biopsy may or may
not necessarily be the next reasonable step.
The following should be considered
before the decision whether or not to
biopsy is made:
- Rule out prostatitis. With the use of a
urine culture, antibiotics, and the uPM3 urine test, it may be possible to rule in or
rule out prostatitis. If prostatitis is detected,
treatment choices should be discussed by
the patient and physician.
- Rule out BPH. This can be done (1) by
calculating prostate size with the ultrasound measurement of the prostate, (2) by
using the uPM3 urine test, and/or (3) with
the use of the free
PSA percentage.
Free PSA is a sub-type of PSA that is associated
with benign prostatic cell proliferation;
the free PSA percentage is equal to
the free PSA divided by the total PSA, multiplied
by 100. A free PSA percentage of
less than 10% (after prostatitis has been
ruled out) should be considered a possible “
flag” for PC, and biopsy would be
warranted. If BPH is found, treatment
choices should be discussed and considered
jointly by patient and physician.
- PSA tests should be repeated regularly and
the results should be followed over time so
that the PSA velocity, or PSAV (rate of
increase in PSA levels in succeeding PSA
tests), can be accurately calculated. A
PSAV of 0.75 ng/ml/year or higher has been reported to be an indicator
of possible PC. An increase greater
than 2 points in a single year has
been shown to correlate with a
greater probability of aggressive PC, and
a biopsy should be considered.
- Following PSA
results over time also enables the accurate calculation of the
PSA doubling time, or PSADT (the rate of
doubling time of PSA level). Estimates
vary, but a PSADT of 10 years or less
can relate to a greater probability for
prostate cancer, and a biopsy should
be considered.
- Measurements made with Transrectal
Ultrasound to determine the prostate
gland volume can also influence the decision
as to whether or not to biopsy. Since
the predicted PSA is equal to the gland
volume times 0.068, the expected tumor
volume can be calculated and located.
A Note About Biopsies
The biopsy is used to determine if a man has
PC or a pre-cancerous condition. The biopsied
tissue provides valuable information about the
grade and aggressiveness of the cancer and is
also helpful in predicting if the cancer has
spread beyond the prostate gland. The most
commonly used grading system was developed
by pathologist Donald Gleason, MD. The Gleason
grading system consists of primary and
sceondary grades, each ranked in aggressiveness
from 1 to 5. The Gleason
score indicates
these two grades in the format of primary
grade, secondary grade, e.g., 3,4. (See the Jan.
2001 issue of PCRI
Insights for details.)
However, biopsies should be understood
in light of their accuracy. Sextant (6
needle) biopsies with grey-scale ultrasound
have been shown to produce a false negative
rate of 20% and the use of this method is waning.
Currently, 10 or more biopsies are obtained
from different regions of the prostate, and the
false negative rate of these biopsy schemes has
decreased modestly.
Specifically, pathology references to hyperplasia (or hypertrophy) usually indicate BPH (an enlarged or enlarging prostate), and references
to inflammation usually indicate prostatitis,
both of which are non-cancerous
urinary tract conditions and possible causes
for elevated PSA levels. Conversely, high-grade
PIN (prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia) found
in biopsy tissue should be considered precancerous
cells, and also a flag for PC. Additional
biopsies should be considered.
Call the PCRI Helpline if you would like
help understanding your PSA test or DRE
results, or if you are having suspicious urinary
tract symptoms that you would like to discuss.
| Call the PCRI Helpline Los
Angeles: 800-641-7274
or 310-743-2110
Florida: 239-395-0995
Georgia: 770-632-2899
Hawaii: 808-891-0209 |
References
1. Lechevallier E, Eghazarian C, Ortega JC et al: Effect of digital
rectal examination
on serum complexed and free prostate-specific antigen and percentage
of free prostate-specific antigen. Urology 54(5):857-861; Nov 1999.
2. Cevik I, Turkeri LN, Ozveri H et al: Short-term effect of digital
rectal examination
on serum prostate specific antigen levels. A prospective study. Eur
Urol: 29(4): 403-6, 1996.
3. Rodriguez-Rubio FI, Robles JE, Gonzalez A et al: Effect of digital
rectal
examination and flexible cystoscopy on free and total prostate-specific
antigen, and the percentage of prostate-specific antigen. Differences
between two assays. Eur Urol. 33(3): 255-60; 1998.
4. Dutkiewicz S, Stepien K, Witeska A: Bladder catheterization and
a plasma
prostate-specific antigen in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia
and
complete urine retention: Mater Med Pol 27(2): 71-3: Apr-Jun 1995.
5. Herschman JD, Smith DS, Catalona WJ: Effect of ejaculation on
serum total and free prostate-specific antigen concentrations. Urology
50(2):
239-43; Aug 1997.
6. Link RE, Shariat SF, Nguyen CV et al: Variations in prostate-specific
antigen
results from 2 different assay platforms: clinical impact on 2304
patients undergoing prostate cancer screening. J Urol. 171(6 pt 1):2234-8;
Jun 2004.
7. Leibovici D, Zisman A, Chen-Levyi Z et al: Elevated prostate-specific
antigen
serum levels after intravesical instillation bacillus Calmette-Guerin.
J
Urol. 164(5): 1546-9; Nov 2000.
8. McNeill SA & Hargreave TB: Efficacy of PSA in the detection
of carcinoma
of the prostate in patients presenting with acute urinary retention.
J R Coll
Surg Edinb. 45(4): 227-30; Aug 2000.
9. Oesterling JE, Rice DC, Glenski
WJ et al: Effect of cystoscopy, prostate biopsy,
and transurethral resection of prostate on serum prostate-specific
antigen
concentration. Urology 42(3): 276-82; Sep 1992.
10. Marks LS, Partin AW, Gormley GJ et al: Prostate tissue composition
and
response to finasteride in men with symptomatic benign prostate
hyperplasia [see comments]. J Urol 157:2171-8, 1997. Comment in
SS J Urol SS
160:134, Jul 1998.
11. Narayan P, Tewari A, Jacob G et al: Differential suppression
of serum prostatic
acid phosphatase and prostate-specific antigen by 5-alpha reductase
inhibitor. J Urol 75(5); 642-6; May 1995.
12. Lake Hospital Systems, Willoughby, OH: Does patient partnership
in continuing
medical education (CME) improve the outcome in osteoporosis
management? J Contin Educ Health Prof 22(3): 142-151; Summer 2002
13. Bridge PD, Berry-Bobovski L, Bridge TJ et al: Evaluation of
a communitybased health education program. J Cancer Educ 17(2):
101-5: Summer
2002.
14. Wilkinson S, List M, Sinner M et al: Educating African-American
men
about prostate cancer: impact on awareness and knowledge. Urology
61(2): 308-313; Feb 2003.
15. Sellers DB & Ross LE: African American men, prostate cancer
screening
and informed decision making. J Natl Med Assoc 95(7): 618-625;
Jul 2003.
16. Nieder AM, Taneja SS, Zeegers MP et al: Genetic counseling
for prostate
cancer risk. Clin Genet 63(3): 169-76; Mar 2003.
17. Bruner DW, Moore D, Parlanti A et al: Relative risk of prostate
cancer for
men with affected relatives: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Int J Cancer
107(5): 797-803; Dec 10 2003.
18. Loman N, Bladstrom A, Johannsson O et al: Cancer incidence
in relatives of a population-based set of cases of early-onset
breast cancer with
a known
BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation status. Breast Cancer Res 5(6): R175-86,
2003.
19. Giovannucci E: Dietary influence of 1,25(OH) 2 vitamin D in
relation to
prostate cancer: a hypothesis. Cancer Causes Control 9(6):567-582;
Dec
1998.
20. Kushi L & Giovannucci E: Dietary fat and cancer. Am J Med;113
Suppl
9B:63S-70S. 2002 Dec 30.
21. Fleming LE, Bean JA, Rudolph M et al: Mortality in a cohort
of licensed pesticide
applicators in Florida. Occup Environ Med 56(1): 14-21;Jan 1999.
22. Mills PK & Yang R: Prostate cancer risk in California farm
workers. J
Occup Environ Med 45(3): 249-58; Mar 2003.
23. Alhara M, Lebovitz RM, Wheeler TM et al: Prostate-specific
antigen and
Gleason grade: an Immunohistochemical study of prostate cancer.
J Urol 151(6): 1588-64; Jun 1994.
24. D’Aprile M, Santani D, DiCosimo S et al: A typical case
of metastatic undifferentiated
prostate carcinoma in a 36 years old man: clinical report and
literature review. Clin Ter 151(5):371-4; Sep-Oct 2000.
25. Ornstein DK, Kang J: How to improve prostate biospy detection
of prostate
cancer. Curr Urol Rep. 2(3): 218-23; Jun 2001.
26. Applewhite J, Hall C: Transrectal Ultrasound and Biopsy in
the Early Diagnosis
of Prostate Cancer. Cancer Control (8):141-150, 2001.
27. Punglia RS, D’Amico AV, Catalona WJ et al: Effect of verification
bias on
screening for prostate cancer by measurement of prostate-specific
antigen. N Eng J Med 349(4): 335-42;Jul 24 2003.
28. Thompson JM, Pauler DK, Goodman PJ et al: Prevalence of prostate
cancer
among men with a prostate-specific antigen =4.0 ng per milliliter.
N
Eng J Med 350 (22): 2239-46; May 27 2004.
29. Martinez L, Tabernero A; Contrearas T:. Determination of the
percentage of free prostate-specific antigen helps to avoid unnecessary
biopsies
in
men with normal rectal examinations and total prostate-specific
antigen of 4-10 ng/ml; Eur Urol 2000 Mar;37(3):289-37; Mar 2000.
30. Carter HB, Pearson JD, Metter EJ, et al. Longitudinal evaluation
of
prostate-specific antigen levels in men with and without prostate
disease. JAMA. 1992; 267:2215-2220.
31. D’Amico AV et al: Preoperative PSA velocity and the risk
of death from
prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. N Eng J Med 351:125-35;
Jul 8
2004.
32. Raaijmakers R, Wildhagen MF, Ito K et al: Prostate-specific
antigen change in the European Randomized Study of Screening
for Prostate
Cancer, Urology. 63(2):316-20; Feb 2004.
33. Terris MK: Sensitivity and specificity of sextant biopsies
in the detection of
prostate cancer: preliminary report. Urology. 54(3): 486-9;
Sept. 1999.
34. Steiner MS: High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia
and prostate
cancer risk reduction. World J Urol: 21(1):15-20; Feb 21, 2003.