© 2005 Oxford University Press
ARTICLE |
Prostate-Specific Antigen Levels in the United States: Implications of Various Definitions for Abnormal
Affiliations of authors: VA Outcomes Group, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, VT; Center for the Evaluative Clinical Sciences, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH
Correspondence to: H. Gilbert Welch, MD, MPH, VA Outcomes Group (111B), Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, VT 05009 (e-mail: H.Gilbert.Welch{at}dartmouth.edu).
Background: The finding that some men with a normal prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (i.e., less than 4 ng/mL) nonetheless have microscopic evidence of prostate cancer has led to some suggestions that the threshold defining abnormal should be lowered to 2.5 ng/mL. We examined the effect of this lower threshold on the number of American men who would be labeled abnormal by a single PSA test. Methods: We obtained PSA data on a nationally representative sample of American men 40 years of age and older with no history of prostate cancer and no current inflammation or infection of the prostate gland (n = 1308) from the 2001–2002 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. We obtained data on the 10-year risk of prostate cancer death in the pre-PSA era from DevCan, the National Cancer Institute's software to calculate the probability of dying of cancer. Results: Based on NHANES data, approximately 1.5 million American men aged 40 to 69 years have a PSA level over 4.0 ng/mL. Lowering the threshold to 2.5 ng/mL would label an additional 1.8 million men as abnormal, if all men were screened. For men aged 70 years or older, the corresponding numbers are 1.5 and 1.2 million. The proportion of the population affected by different thresholds would vary with age. Among men in their 60s, for example, 17% have a PSA level over 2.5 ng/mL, 5.7% have a PSA level over 4.0 ng/mL, and 1.7% have a PSA level over 10.0 ng/mL. For context, only 0.9% of men in their 60s are expected to die from prostate cancer in the next 10 years. Conclusion: Lowering the PSA threshold to 2.5 ng/mL would double the number of men defined as abnormal, to up to 6 million. Until there is evidence that screening is effective, increasing the number of men recommended for prostate biopsy—and the number potentially diagnosed and treated unnecessarily—would be a mistake.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  T. J. Wilt SPCG-4: A Needed START to PIVOTal Data to Promote and ProtecT Evidence-Based Prostate Cancer Care J Natl Cancer Inst, August 20, 2008; 100(16): 1123 - 1125. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Screening for Prostate Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement Ann Intern Med, August 5, 2008; 149(3): 185 - 191. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Lin, R. Lipsitz, T. Miller, and S. Janakiraman Benefits and Harms of Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening for Prostate Cancer: An Evidence Update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Ann Intern Med, August 5, 2008; 149(3): 192 - 199. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. J. Barry Commentary: How Serious Is Getting a Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer? Oncologist, March 1, 2008; 13(3): 306 - 308. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. D. Etzioni, D. P. Ankerst, N. S. Weiss, L. Y. T. Inoue, and I. M. Thompson Is Prostate-Specific Antigen Velocity Useful in Early Detection of Prostate Cancer? A Critical Appraisal of the Evidence J Natl Cancer Inst, October 17, 2007; 99(20): 1510 - 1515. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. G. Welch, E. S. Fisher, D. J. Gottlieb, and M. J. Barry Detection of Prostate Cancer via Biopsy in the Medicare SEER Population During the PSA Era J Natl Cancer Inst, September 19, 2007; 99(18): 1395 - 1400. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Labrecque, F. Legare, and M. Cauchon Rebuttal: Should Canadians be offered systematic prostate cancer screening?: NO Can Fam Physician, July 1, 2007; 53(7): 1140 - 1141. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Labrecque, F. Legare, and M. Cauchon Refutation: Devrait-on offrir aux Canadiens le depistage systematique du cancer de la prostate?: NON Can Fam Physician, July 1, 2007; 53(7): 1142 - 1143. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. J Wilt and I. M Thompson Clinically localised prostate cancer BMJ, November 25, 2006; 333(7578): 1102 - 1106. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. B. Carter, L. Ferrucci, A. Kettermann, P. Landis, E. J. Wright, J. I. Epstein, B. J. Trock, and E. J. Metter Detection of life-threatening prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen velocity during a window of curability. J Natl Cancer Inst, November 1, 2006; 98(21): 1521 - 1527. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. C. Miller, S. B. Gruber, B. K. Hollenbeck, J. E. Montie, and J. T. Wei Incidence of initial local therapy among men with lower-risk prostate cancer in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst, August 16, 2006; 98(16): 1134 - 1141. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. M. Hoffman Viewpoint: limiting prostate cancer screening. Ann Intern Med, March 21, 2006; 144(6): 438 - 440. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Another Salvo in the PSA Controversy Journal Watch Gastroenterology, August 30, 2005; 2005(830): 4 - 4. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Another Salvo in the PSA Controversy Journal Watch (General), August 26, 2005; 2005(826): 1 - 1. [Full Text]
|
|