[Prostate cancer screening-current overview]. / Das Prostatakarzinom-Screening ­ aktueller Überblick.

BACKGROUND: The harm-to-benefit ratio of prostate cancer (PCa) screening remains controversial mainly due to the unfavorable test characteristics of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a screening test. METHODS: In this nonsystematic review, we present a current overview of the body of evidence on prostate cancer screening with a focus on the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate. RESULTS: Evidence generated in large randomized controlled trials showed that PSA-based screening significantly decreases cancer-specific mortality. The main obstacle in developing and implementing PCa screening strategies is the resulting overdiagnosis and as a consequence overtreatment of indolent cancers. Opportunistic screening is characterized by an adverse benefit-to-harm ratio and should, therefore, not be recommended. The German Statutory Early Detection Program for prostate cancer, which consists of a digital rectal examination (DRE) as a stand-alone screening test, is not evidence-based, neither specific nor sensitive enough and results in unnecessary diagnostics. The European Commission recently urged member states to develop population-based and organized risk-adapted PSA-based screening programs, which are currently tested in the ongoing German PROBASE trial. Finetuning of the diagnostic pathway following PSA-testing seems key to improve its positive and negative predictive value and thereby making PCa screening more accurate. Incorporation of prostatic MRI into screening strategies leads to more accurate diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer, while diagnosis of indolent cancers is reduced. In the future, molecular liquid-based biomarkers have the potential to complement or even replace PSA in PCa screening and further personalize screening strategies. Active surveillance as an alternative to immediate radical therapy of demographically increasing PCa diagnoses can potentially further improve the benefit-to-harm ratio of organized screening. CONCLUSION: Early detection of PCa should be organized on a population level into personalized and evidence-based screening strategies. Multiparametric MRI of the prostate may play a key role in this setting.

Risk-adjusted Screening for Prostate Cancer-Defining the Low-risk Group by Data from the PROBASE Trial.

BACKGROUND: Risk-adjusted screening for prostate cancer (PCa) aims to reduce harms by less frequent retesting, especially in men at a low risk of PCa. Definitions of low risk are based mainly on studies in men starting screening at age 55-60 yr. OBJECTIVE: To identify men at age 45 yr with a low risk of PCa. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A population-based, risk-adjusted PCa screening trial was conducted in Germany using baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) starting in young men (PROBASE). INTERVENTION: PSA measurements starting at the age of 45 yr. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The incidence of PCa within 5 yr was assessed in men with screen-negative baseline PSA <1.5 ng/ml compared with those with PSA 1.5-≤3.0 ng/ml. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 23301 men who received a first PSA test at age 45 yr, 0.79% had a screen-positive PSA value of ≥3 ng/ml. Among the 89% of men who had a screen-negative baseline PSA value of <1.5 ng/ml, only 0.45% received a positive PSA test ≥3 ng/ml upon retesting after 5 yr. By contrast, for those with a screen-negative baseline PSA value of 1.5-3 ng/ml, 13% surpassed 3 ng/ml upon biennial testing within the next 4 yr. The incidence of PCa in subsequent screening rounds increased with increasing baseline PSA levels, from 0.13 per 1000 person-years for men with initial PSA level of <1.5 ng/ml to 8.0 per 1000 person-years for those with PSA levels of 1.5-3.0 ng/ml. A limitation is a follow-up time of only 5 yr, so far. CONCLUSIONS: Men with baseline PSA <1.5 ng/ml at age 45 yr are at a very low risk of PCa over the next 5 yr. PATIENT SUMMARY: The PROBASE study showed that men with baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <1.5 ng/ml at age 45 yr have a very low prostate cancer detection rate over 5 yr and do not need PSA retesting during this time.

Quality Control Indicators for Transurethral Resection of Non-Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer.

Complete transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) is the initial procedure of choice for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, but its quality is far from optimal in clinical practice. We evaluated the existing body of evidence substantiating current quality control indicators (QCIs) for TURBT. A literature search was performed using PubMed and Embase, and selected articles were reviewed according to their level of evidence. Disease recurrence and progression were used as the primary end points. No hard evidence supports complete resection as a QCI, but rationally, it is the most important indicator for TURBT. A repeat resection is an important QCI in high-risk disease patients, but evidence suggests that it may not be necessary when detrusor muscle is present in the initial resection specimen. The presence of detrusor muscle in the resection specimen is a validated QCI for TURBT. Adjuvant intravesical instillation is a scientifically proven QCI. Bladder perforation is a controversial QCI in the existing literature. No evidence indicates the ideal time frame for the initial TURBT; thus, initial therapy in the first 6 weeks after diagnosis is not a good QCI. Three of the 6 proposed QCIs for TURBT are supported by evidence. Our literature analysis indicated the use of complete resection, repeat resection, the presence of detrusor muscle, and intravesical instillation are QCIs to minimize recurrence and progression, and increase beneficial outcomes.