PlumX Metrics
Embed PlumX Metrics

Serendipity in detecting disease in low prostate-specific antigen ranges

BJU International, ISSN: 1464-4096, Vol: 89, Issue: 4, Page: 384-389
2002
  • 23
    Citations
  • 0
    Usage
  • 26
    Captures
  • 0
    Mentions
  • 0
    Social Media
Metric Options:   Counts1 Year3 Year

Metrics Details

Article Description

Objective: To assess the magnitude of prostate cancer detection by serendipity (the coincidental detection of prostate cancer during the evaluation of an abnormal screening test result) when a digital rectal examination (DRE) and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) are used as initial screening tests for prostate cancer in men with low levels of prostate-specific antigen (PSA; 0.0-3.9 ng/mL). Patients and methods: In all, 117 participants of a population-based screening study were diagnosed with prostate cancer after a standard evaluation of an abnormal screening test result; 49 underwent radical prostatectomy. Serendipity was defined as either: (i) the presence of prostate cancer opposite to the side that raised suspicion for cancer on DRE and/or TRUS; (ii) a negative lesion-directed biopsy while cancer was present in one or more of the cores of the sextant biopsy; (iii) a tumour volume of <0.5 mL on radical prostatectomy. Results: Depending on the definition, 2 7-63% of prostate cancers detected at low PSA values were detected coincidentally and not as a result of a true-positive test result. The proportion of cancers detected by serendipity was inversely correlated with serum PSA level. Conclusion: A relatively high proportion of prostate cancers diagnosed in men with low PSA levels, and in which a biopsy was prompted by a suspicious DRE and/or TRUS, are considered to be detected by chance only. As these cancers are mostly small (<0.5 mL), with potentially low biological aggressiveness, relying on serendipity seems disadvantageous in prostate-cancer screening. The level of serendipity in prostate cancer detection, the poor performance of the screening test, and high inter-observer variability, casts further doubt on the utility of DRE (and TRUS) as initial screening tests for prostate cancer in population-based screening.

Provide Feedback

Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know