scholarly journals General practitioners’ approaches to prostate-specific antigen testing in the north-east of the Netherlands

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanny Kappen ◽  
Lisa Koops ◽  
Verena Jürgens ◽  
Michael H. Freitag ◽  
Marco H. Blanker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
North East ◽  
The North ◽  
Psa Testing

Abstract Background There is wide variation in clinical practice for the early detection of prostate cancer, not least because of the ongoing debate about the benefits of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. In this study, we aimed to assess the approaches, attitudes, and knowledge of general practitioners (GPs) regarding PSA testing in primary care in the Netherlands, particularly regarding recommendations for prostate cancer. Methods Questionnaire surveys were sent to 179 GPs in the north-east of the Netherlands, of which 65 (36%) were completed and returned. We also surveyed 23 GPs attending a postgraduate train-the-trainer day (100%). In addition to demographic data and practice characteristics, the 31-item questionnaire covered the attitudes, clinical practice, adherence to PSA screening recommendations, and knowledge concerning the recommendations for prostate cancer early detection. Statistical analysis was limited to the descriptive level. Results Most GPs (95%; n = 82) stated that they had at least read the Dutch GP guideline, but just half (50%; n = 43) also stated that they knew the content. Almost half (46%; n = 39) stated they would offer detailed counseling before ordering a PSA test to an asymptomatic man requesting a test. Overall, prostate cancer screening was reported to be of minor importance compared to other types of cancer screening. Conclusions Clinical PSA testing in primary care in this region of the Netherlands seems generally to be consistent with the relevant guideline for Dutch GPs that is restrictive to PSA testing. The next step will be to further evaluate the effects of the several PSA testing strategies.

Point/Counterpoint: Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: Do the Benefits Outweigh the Consequences?

2014 ◽  
Vol 12 (5S) ◽  
pp. 768-771 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter R. Carroll ◽  
Andrew J. Vickers
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
The Other ◽  
Annual Conference ◽  
Nccn Guidelines ◽  
Cancer Early Detection ◽  
Psa Testing

Few clinical issues have polarized the oncology community as much as screening for prostate cancer, with advocates of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing vocal on one side and skeptics just as vocal on the other. At the NCCN 19th Annual Conference, Dr. Peter R. Carroll and Dr. Andrew J. Vickers tackled the controversy surrounding early detection of prostate cancer, focusing attention on the randomized trial results at the heart of the matter; over-detection (the Achilles’ heel of screening); and the rationale behind the new, streamlined 2014 NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Prostate Cancer Early Detection, which emphasize selective early detection and treatment and are tightly aligned with the NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer.

scholarly journals Prostate Cancer Screening in the Workplace

AAOHN Journal ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
pp. 379-384 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Snyder ◽  
Peggy N. Schrammel ◽  
Claudia B. Griffiths ◽  
Robert I. Griffiths
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Screening Tests ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Total Cost ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Psa Testing ◽  
The Cost

Recognition of the mortality and morbidity associated with prostate cancer has resulted in employer based screening programs. This retrospective cohort study identified the employer costs of prostate cancer screening and referrals due to abnormal test results. The subjects were 385 men enrolled in a workplace screening program at a single employer between 1993 and 1995. Screening consisted of digital rectal examination (DRE) annually for enrolled employees aged 40 years and older, plus annual prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing for those 50 and older, and those 40 and older and considered at high risk. Data related to the health care and lost productivity costs of screening and referrals for abnormal test results were collected and analyzed. The total cost of screening was $44,355, or approximately $56 per screening encounter (788 DREs; 437 PSAs). Abnormal screening tests resulted in 52 referrals. Upon further evaluation, 42% were found to have an enlargement, 29% a node, and 12% benign prostatic hyperplasia. Only one malignancy was found. The total cost of additional referrals was $31,815, or 42% of the cost of screening plus referrals. As the cost per screening encounter was low, prostate cancer screening in the workplace is an efficient alternative.

scholarly journals Prostate cancer screening: guidelines review and laboratory issues

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (10) ◽  
pp. 1474-1487 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xavier Filella ◽  
María Dolores Albaladejo ◽  
Juan Antonio Allué ◽  
Miguel Angel Castaño ◽  
Daniel Morell-Garcia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
World Health ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Screening Guidelines ◽  
Psa Testing ◽  
Medical Institutions ◽  
Health Organization

Abstract Background Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) remains as the most used biomarker in the detection of early prostate cancer (PCa). Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are produced to facilitate incorporation of evidence into clinical practice. This is particularly useful when PCa screening remains controversial and guidelines diverge among different medical institutions, although opportunistic screening is not recommended. Methods We performed a systematic review of guidelines about PCa screening using PSA. Guidelines published since 2008 were included in this study. The most updated version of these CPGs was used for the evaluation. Results Twenty-two guidelines were selected for review. In 59% of these guidelines, recommendations were graded according to level of evidence (n = 13), but only 18% of the guidelines provided clear algorithms (n = 4). Each CPG was assessed using a checklist of laboratory issues, including pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical factors. We found that laboratory medicine specialists participate in 9% of the guidelines reviewed (n = 2) and laboratory issues were frequently omitted. We remarked that information concerning the consequences of World Health Organization (WHO) standard in PSA testing was considered by only two of 22 CPGs evaluated in this study. Conclusions We concluded that the quality of PCa early detection guidelines could be improved properly considering the laboratory issues in their development.

scholarly journals Prostate-specific antigen testing for prostate cancer screening: A national survey of Canadian primary care physicians’ opinions and practices

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 396-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitchell Geoffrey Goldenberg ◽  
Sean C. Skeldon ◽  
Madhur Nayan ◽  
Yegappan Suppiah ◽  
Linda Chow ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
National Survey ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Psa Screening

Introduction: In 2014, the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC) recommended against routine prostate cancer screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood test.1 We surveyed Canadian primary care physicians (PCPs) to understand their opinions and attitudes towards prostate cancer screening in 2016.Methods: Twenty PCPs piloted the survey to assess its accessibility. We distributed a flyer to 19 633 PCPs as an insert in a large mailed package inviting them to attend a national meeting, and later promoted the survey at the meeting. Multinomial logistic regression models examined factors associated with agreement of key guideline statements and the overall benefit of PSA screening.Results: A total of 1254 PCPs responded (rate of 6.4%); 54.7% of physicians aware of the CTFPHC recommendations report screening less often as a result. Overall, 55.6% of PCPs feel that the risks of PSA screening outweigh the benefits. On multivariable analysis, physicians who did not read the guidelines, did not have an academic appointment, or were in practice for over 20 years were significantly more likely to disagree with the statement that men 55‒69 years old should not be screened for prostate cancer with PSA.Conclusions: Our national survey found that the prostate cancer screening practices of Canadian PCPs varies widely across physician demographic groups, with almost equal numbers for or against. This has significant ethical, medical, and legal implications. The poor response rate to highly incentivized survey request may suggest a reluctance or general apathy towards this subject because of the Task Force recommendations. Future efforts should provide physicians with objective guidance around PSA screening, incorporating input from all stakeholders, including PCPs, urologists, and patients.

scholarly journals Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: a clinical practice guideline

BMJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. k3581 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kari A O Tikkinen ◽  
Philipp Dahm ◽  
Lyubov Lytvyn ◽  
Anja F Heen ◽  
Robin W M Vernooij ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Clinical Practice Guideline ◽  
Practice Guideline ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Psa Test

scholarly journals Racial and Ethnic Variation in PSA Testing and Prostate Cancer Incidence Following the 2012 USPSTF Recommendation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin H Kensler ◽  
Claire H Pernar ◽  
Brandon A Mahal ◽  
Paul L Nguyen ◽  
Quoc-Dien Trinh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cancer Incidence ◽  
Race And Ethnicity ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Disease Incidence ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Prostate Cancer Incidence ◽  
Psa Testing

Abstract Background The 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation against routine prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing led to a decrease in prostate cancer screening, but the heterogeneity of its impact by race and ethnicity remains unclear. Methods The proportion of 40- to 74-year-old men who self-reported receiving a routine PSA test in the past year was estimated in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (2012-2018). Odds ratios (ORs) of undergoing screening by race and ethnicity were estimated, adjusting for healthcare–related factors. Prostate cancer incidence rates and rate ratios (IRRs) by race and ethnicity were estimated using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry data (2004-2017). Results PSA testing frequencies were 32.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 31.7% to 32.8%) among non-Hispanic White (NHW), 30.3% (95% CI = 28.3% to 32.3%) among non-Hispanic Black (NHB), 21.8% (95% CI = 19.9% to 23.7%) among Hispanic, and 17.7% (95% CI = 14.1% to 21.3%) among Asian and Pacific Islander men in 2012. The absolute screening frequency declined by 9.5% from 2012 to 2018, with a larger decline among NHB (11.6%) than NHW men (9.3%). The relative annual decrease was greater among NHB (OR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.84 to 0.88) than NHW men (OR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.89 to 0.90; Pheterogeneity = .005), driven by a larger decline among NHB men ages 40-54 years. The NHB to NHW IRR for total prostate cancer increased from 1.73 (95% CI = 1.69 to 1.76) in 2011 to 1.87 (95% CI = 1.83 to 1.92) in 2012 and has remained elevated, driven by differences in localized tumor incidence. Metastatic disease incidence is rising across all racial and ethnic groups. Conclusions The frequency of prostate cancer screening varies by race and ethnicity, and there was a modestly steeper decline in PSA testing among younger NHB men relative to NHW men since 2012. The NHB to NHW IRR for localized prostate cancer modestly increased following 2012.

scholarly journals Perception of Abnormal Serum Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Test Results amongst Family Practitioners

2008 ◽  
Vol 90 (5) ◽  
pp. 398-402 ◽  
Author(s):  
MA Rochester ◽  
PJ Donaldson ◽  
J McLoughlin
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Psa Test ◽  
Serum Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Psa Testing ◽  
Family Practitioners ◽  
Younger Men ◽  
Psa Velocity

INTRODUCTION With increased use of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, prostate cancers are diagnosed at an earlier stage in younger men, when radical curative treatments are appropriate. Modifications of the PSA test such as PSA velocity and age-adjusted values are available to aid in the selection of patients for biopsy. However, it is not clear whether these data are used in general practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to all primary care practices within one region in the UK. A series of visual analogue questions designed to identify referral thresholds for age-adjusted PSA levels and PSA velocity were used to identify patterns in referral behaviour. RESULTS Individual family practitioners see only small numbers of patients requesting PSA tests or with newly diagnosed prostate cancer each year. The median (range) thresholds considered for referral at ages 45, 55, 65, 75 and 85 years were 4.5 ng/ml (2.5–15.5 ng/ml), 5.5 ng/ml (3.0–15.5 ng/ml), 6.5 ng/ml (3.5–15.5 ng/ml), 6.5 ng/ml (3.5–25.5 ng/ml), and 7.5 ng/ml (3.5–25.5 ng/ml), respectively. Only 5% of practitioners correctly identified the age-specific PSA threshold for referral of a 45-year-old man. CONCLUSIONS It is important to remember that younger men (even those in their forties and fifties) may be at risk of prostate cancer even if asymptomatic. It is important in a climate of increasing demand for PSA testing that those who initiate the process understand the implications and limitations of testing, including appropriate triggers for referral to secondary care. The exact approach required for the successful dissemination of this information to primary care is not clear, but our data suggest that a better understanding is required.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document