ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Investigators speculate that hereditary thrombotic disease coupled with acquired factors account for a large number of pulmonary thromboemboli. Clinical correlation between genetic and acquired factors with fatal pulmonary thromboemboli has not been extensively studied. METHODS: Archival autopsy material was obtained from patients who died of or with pulmonary emboli for whom confirmed autopsy results were available. Polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis was performed for factor V Leiden and factor II/20210A allele. Retrospective chart review was performed to determine the presence or absence of acquired factors that can predispose to pulmonary thromboemboli. RESULTS: Two of 36 patients (5.5%) were heterozygous for factor V Leiden. No patients had detected abnormalities for factor II/20210A allele. Eight patients (22.2%) had a malignancy present, one of whom was heterozygous for factor V Leiden. Fourteen patients (38.8%) had recent major surgery or were immobilized. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of factor V Leiden and factor II/20210A allele in patients with fatal pulmonary thromboemboli is not greater than published results of the incidence of these factors in the general population. Recognized acquired factors such as malignancy, recent surgery, and immobilization are frequently present in these patients. Our results suggest that genetic profiling of thrombotic disease will not replace clinical vigilance in reducing the risk for death from pulmonary thromboemboli.
Subject(s)
Factor V/genetics , Prothrombin/genetics , Pulmonary Embolism/genetics , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Immobilization , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/etiology , Polymerase Chain Reaction , Polymorphism, Restriction Fragment Length , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Pulmonary Embolism/surgery , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The traditional normal range for prostate-specific antigen has been 0.0 to 4.0 ng/mL. Two different age-specific normal ranges have been proposed, one by Oesterling et al and the other generated by the Prostate Cancer Awareness Week experience. METHODS: We studied 213 consecutive cases of biopsy-proven prostate adenocarcinoma to evaluate age-specific normal ranges for prostate-specific antigen. We examined each patient's age, stage of disease, and serum concentration of prostate-specific antigen at the time of diagnosis. The three normal ranges were applied to each case. RESULTS: The patients ranged in age from 45 to 87 years. At all stages of disease, more patients had elevated serum prostate-specific antigen values using the traditional normal range as opposed to either age-specific normal range. These discrepancies were most obvious for stage II disease, in which 93 of 119 cases (78%) were elevated according to the traditional normal range versus 78 of 119 cases (66%) according to the Oesterling et al range and 80 of 119 cases (67%) according to the range defined during Prostate Cancer Awareness Week. For patients aged 40 to 59 years, all three normal ranges provided identical results (18 of 22 [82%] cancers detected). CONCLUSIONS: Use of either age-specific normal range would have missed more than 10% of stage II prostate adenocarcinomas in patients over the age of 60 years. This indicates that caution should be exercised when applying age-adjusted normal ranges for serum concentrations of prostate-specific antigen in patients of that age group.
