Alonso – Méndez BA, Rodríguez – Pontones JA

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 73-78
PDF size: 321.01 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background. The limitations of the specific prostate antigen and rectal touch to identify patients with prostate cancer has led to parameters being defined which increase specificity without reducing sensitivity. Ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy is the only method to obtain a diagnosis from nature of prostate cancer. In our field the accepted cutoff point for the biopsy is a specific prostate antigen value above 4 ng/ml. However, one of the most extensively studied parameters to increase specificity has been fit of the total specific prostate antigen value as a function of total prostate gland volume.
Objective. Determine the relationship between prostate size and diagnosis of prostate cancer with samples obtained from patients submitted to transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy.
Material and methods. A prospective, observational, transverse and comparative study in a population of 100 patients.
Results. In the population with histopathologic diagnosis of prostate cancer (n = 34), 22% of patients were classified as having prostate volume below 50 grams and only 8.8% with prostate volume above 50 grams. The study group was characterized considering prostate volume, volume of specific prostate antigen, positive rectal touch, and the result of a prostate biopsy (p = 0.001).
Conclusions. This study underscores the association between prostate volume, the specific prostate antigen, and rectal touch. Total prostate weight was lower in patients positive for cancer and higher for patients with diagnosis of benignancy.

REFERENCES

1. Secretaría de Salud. Registro Histopatológico de Neoplasias Malignas. Dirección General Adjunta de Epidemiología, México 1993-2004.

2. Fütterer J, Heijmink S, Spermon JR. Imaging the male reproductive tract: current trends and future directions. Radiol Clin N Am 2008;46:133–147.

3. Morote J, Ruibal A, Palou J. Evaluation of specific antigen and prostatic acid phosphatase specificity. Study of false Values”. Int J Biol Markers 1986;1:141.

4. Benson MC, Whang IS, Pantuck A y cols “Prostate specific antigen density: a means of distinguishing benign prostatic hypertrophy and prostate cancer”. J Urol 1992;147:815.

5. Stamey TA, Yang N, Hay AR, et al. Prostate specific antigen as a serum marker for adenocarcinoma of the prostate. N Engl JMed 1987;15:909-16.

6. Babaian RJ, Miyashita H, Evans RE, Ramirez EI. The distribution of prostate specific antigen in men without clinical or pathological evidence of prostate cancer: relationship to gland volume and age. J Urol 1992;147:837-40.

7. Brawer MK. Complexed PSA: the newest advance in PSA testing. Urology 1999;54:2-3.

8. Djavan B, Zlotta AR, Byttebier G, Shariat S, Omar M, Schulman CC, et al. Prostate specific antigen density of the transition zone for early detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 1998;160:411-8.

9. Catalona WJ, Smith DS, Wolfert RL, Wang TJ, Ritten house HG, Ratliff TL, et al. Evaluation of percentage of free serum prostate-specific antigen to improve specificity of prostate cancer screening. JAMA 1995;274:1214-20.

10. Prestigia como AF, Stamey TA. Can free and total prostate specific antigen and prostatic volume distinguish between men with negative and positive systematic ultrasound guided prostate biopsies? J Urol 1997;157:189-94.

11. Uzzo RG, Wei JT, Waldbaum RS, Perlmutter AP, Byrne JC, Vaughan ED. The influence of prostate size on cancer detection. Urology 1995;46:831-6.

12. Freedland SJ, Isaacs WB, Platz EA, Terris MK, Aronson WJ, Amling CL, et al. Prostate size and risk of high-grade, advanced prostate cancer and biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy: a search database study. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:7546.

13. Turley RS, Hamilton RJ, Terris MK, Kane CJ, Aronson WJ, Presti JC, et al. Small transrectal ultrasound volume predicts clinically significant gleason score upgrading alter radical prostatectomy: results from the search database. J Urol 2008;179

14. Newton MR, Phillips S, Chang SS, Clark PE, Cookson MS, Davis R,et al. Smaller prostate size predicts high grade prostate cancer at final pathology. J Urol 2010;184:930.

15. González-Enguita C, Fernández-Acenero MJ, García-Donoso JV, López-Pérez L, Mnazarbeitia F, Vela R. Relación entre volumen de la glándula prostática y algunos marcadores histológicos de malignidad. Actas Urol Esp 2012;36:86-90.

16. Babain, RJKojima, M, Ramirez, El, et al. Comparative analysis of prostate specific antigen and its indexes in the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 1996;156:432.

17. Eskew LA Bare RL, Mc Cullough D.L systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 1997;157:199.

18. Presti JC Jr. Prostate biopsy: how many cores are enough? Urol Oncol 2003;21:135.

19. Karakiewicz PI, Bazinet M, Aprikian AG, et al. Outcome of sextant biopsy according to gland volume. Urology 1997;49:55.

20. Stamey TA, Caldwell M, Mc Neal, JE, et al. The prostate specific antigen era in the united States is over for prostate cancer: what happened in the last 20 years? J Urol 2004;172:1297.