4.4 Article

A Commentary on PSA Velocity and Doubling Time for Clinical Decisions in Prostate Cancer

期刊

UROLOGY
卷 83, 期 3, 页码 592-596

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.09.075

关键词

-

资金

  1. Prostate Cancer Foundation
  2. Sidney Kimmel Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers
  3. SPORE grant from the National Cancer Institute [P50-CA92629]
  4. Cancer Center Support Grant [P30-CA008748]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although the value of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) velocity or doubling time has never been seriously questioned for aiding the clinical management of recurrent or advanced cancer, there has historically been considerable uncertainty about PSA kinetics for decisions about biopsy and initial treatment. Recent studies, including analyses of cohorts from all the major randomized trials of localized prostate cancer, have failed to find any evidence that PSA velocity and application of PSA cutpoints are of benefit in this setting. Given current data on PSA velocity and doubling time, we propose the following take home messages for the practicing urologist: (1) High PSA velocity is not an indication for biopsy; (2) for men with a low total PSA but a high PSA velocity, consideration should be given to having PSA taken at a shorter interval; (3) men with an indication for biopsy should be biopsied irrespective of PSA velocity; (4) changes in PSA after negative biopsy findings do not determine the need for repeat biopsy; (5) monitoring PSA over time can aid judgment in decisions about biopsy, as informed by the clinical context; (6) PSA velocity is uninformative of risk at diagnosis; (7) high PSA velocity is not an indication for treatment in men on active surveillance; (8) PSA velocity at the time of recurrence should be entered into prediction models (or nomograms) to aid patient counseling; (9) PSA changes after treatment for advanced disease can help indicate therapeutic response. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据