Article Figures & Data
Tables
Reference Population Size(all males) Age(years) Detection Rate(%) Localized PCA(% of Total)* Bx/PCA† Bangma et al14 1,726 Netherlands 55 –76 3.88 88.06 4.60 Brett15 211 Australian 50 –79 1.42 3.67 Bretton16 1,027 American 40 –89 3.80 64.40 5.77 Gustafsson et al17 1,782 Swedish 55 –70 2.71 5.71 Higashihara et al7 701 Japanese 50 –92 1.85 8.92 Horninger et al18 21,078 Austrian 45 –79 0.94 3.95 Horninger et al18 21,078 Austrian 40 –65 2.77 85.71 4.13 Imai et al19 1,680 Japanese 39 –89 0.89 8.80 Imai et al20 3,276 Japanese 40 –89 1.40 60.78 5.52 Jubelirer et al3 142 American 50 –85 75.00 3.75 Maattanen et al5 5,053 Finish 55 –75 2.34 90.00 3.80 Reissigl et al21 2,272 Austrian 40 –65 2.85 86.00 3.97 Stenman et al22 7,204 Finish 45 –84 0.61 Tsukamoto et al23 1,639 Japanese 1.10 6.39 Pooled results 47,791 1.80 83.40 4.00 * % of local PCA = localized prostate carcinoma/total prostate carcinoma × 100.
† Bx/PCA = total biopsies performed/actual number of positive biopsies.
- Table 2.
Positive Predictive Value, Sensitivity, and Specificity of Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) as Screening Parameter.
Reference Population with PSA > 4 ng/mL(%) Positive Predictive Value(%) Sensitivity(%) Specificity(%) Bangma et al14 10.31 30.90 Brett15 9.50 66.67 18.00 Bretton16 13.00 27.91 92.31 Gustafsson et al17 17.17 17.00 80.00 Higashihara et al7 11.27 24.00 92.30 63.10 Horninger et al18 8.88 25.32 Horninger et al18 12.50 22.18 Imai et al19 4.46 27.50 73.33 99.75 Imai et al20 5.13 45.10 80.40 Jubelirer et al3 12.60 30.00 100.00 100.00 Maattanen et al5 8.47 27.00 Reissigl et al21 10.74 18.00 Stenman et al22 57.00 97.00 Tsukamoto et al23 4.30 23.20 88.90 Pooled results 10.10 25.10 72.10 93.20 Positive predictive value of PSA = percent of positive biopsies/total positive PSA.
- Table 3.
Positive Predictive Value, Sensitivity and Specificity of Digital Rectal Examination (DRE) as a Screening Parameter.
Reference Population Abnormal(%) Positive Predictive Value(%) Sensitivity(%) Specificity(%) Bangma et al14 6.84 33.06 Brett15 19.00 66.67 18.00 Bretton16 7.60 Gustafsson et al17 27.39 Higashihara et al7 19.30 10.60 69.20 26.20 Imai et al19 9.41 13.33 53.33 99.54 Imai et al20 10.78 17.20 49.00 93.33 Jubelirer et al3 14.08 22.22 50.00 50.00 Reissigl et al21 5.00 Tsukamoto et al23 4.21 Pooled results 5.00 17.80 53.20 83.60 Positive predictive value of DRE = percent of positive biopsies/total positive DRE.
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- Assessment of Prostate Volume and Prostate-specific Antigen Density With the Segmentation Method on Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- A Caenorhabditis elegans behavioral assay distinguishes early stage prostate cancer patient urine from controls
- Prediction models for prostate cancer to be used in the primary care setting: a systematic review
- Circulating Tumor Cell Counts in Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer Including Those Under Active Surveillance
- Does a novel diagnostic pathway including blood-based risk prediction and MRI-targeted biopsies outperform prostate cancer screening using prostate-specific antigen and systematic prostate biopsies? - protocol of the randomised study STHLM3MRI
- Methylation panel is a diagnostic biomarker for Barretts oesophagus in endoscopic biopsies and non-endoscopic cytology specimens
- Digital Rectal Examination for Prostate Cancer Screening in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- Knowledge and practice of prostate cancer screening among general practitioners in Malaysia: a cross-sectional study
- Combined PET/MRI Improves Diagnostic Accuracy in Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Prospective Diagnostic Trial
- Multicenter Evaluation of [-2]Proprostate-Specific Antigen and the Prostate Health Index for Detecting Prostate Cancer
- TMPRSS2-ERG Fusion Transcripts in Matched Urine and Needle Rinse Material after Biopsy for the Detection of Prostate Cancer: Really a Step Forward?
- The liver pharmacological and xenobiotic gene response repertoire