The predictive value of DRE in the modern era of prostate cancer diagnostics.

Authors

null

Joel Marcus Andersson

Karolinska Institutet, Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Stockholm, Sweden

Joel Marcus Andersson , Tobias Nordström , Martin Eklund , Henrik Gronberg

Organizations

Karolinska Institutet, Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Stockholm, Sweden, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden

Research Funding

Other

Background: DRE (digital rectal examination) suspicious for prostate cancer is still used as a clinical tool to diagnose prostate cancer. We aim to analyse the predictive value of DRE to diagnose prostate cancer ISUP grade group ≥2 (GG≥2) prostate cancer including the setting of STHLM3 test as a variable. Methods: The previously described STHLM3 screening-cohort included men between 50 to 70 years with ≥10% risk of prostate cancer as assessed by PSA or the Stockholm3 test and invited for transrectal biopsy (TRUSbx). All 7415 biopsied men was included for analysis. DRE status was categorized as T1-T4. We analysed sensitivity (Sn), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for DRE status of T2-4 to predict GG≥2 and GG≥3 in biopsies. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis; we adjusted for PSA, age, PVol, earlier biopsy (EB) and adjusted STHLM3 model risk set to exclude DRE and prostate volume (PVol). We calculated adjusted odds ratio (OR) for different strata of adjusted STHLM3 risk. Results: Prevalence of ISUP≥2 was 16.8% (1,243/7415). 9.7% (716/7415) men had DRE suspicious for cancer (T2-4) with a Sn to detect GG≥2 of 25.2%. Sp, PPV and NPV was 93.5%, 43.7% and 86.1%, respectively. In univariate model the OR for DRE T2-4 vs. T1 to predict GG≥2 was 4.28 (95% CI 4.09–5.67). Logistic regression analysis including also age, PVol, PSA, earlier biopsies and adjusted STHLM3 risk (%) gave an OR for DRE T2-4 of 2.87 (95% CI 2.36–3.49). In the same analysis stratified PSA group 5-10 ng/ml with PSA < 3 ng/ml as baseline gave OR = 3.21. Using the same univariate model, OR for DRE T2-4 vs. T1 to predict GG≥3 was 6.68 (95% CI 5.44–8.21) and in the multivariate model OR was 3.25 (95% CI 2.54–4.17). Conclusions: As a diagnostic test DRE holds little merit on its own but in combination with other clinical factors and biomarkers in this study we could show that it contributes with value. Just under half of men with DRE suspicious for cancer has GG≥2 cancer. This study does not establish evidence to rule out DRE as a clinically valuable adjunct to PSA, other clinical parameters and new biomarkers like STHLM3.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2019 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session A: Prostate Cancer

Track

Prostate Cancer,Prostate Cancer

Sub Track

Prostate Cancer - Localized Disease

Citation

J Clin Oncol 37, 2019 (suppl 7S; abstr 48)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2019.37.7_suppl.48

Abstract #

48

Poster Bd #

C16

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

First Author: Alexandre Akoulitchev

First Author: Mahmood Moshiri

First Author: Ekamjit Singh Deol

First Author: Cameron J Britton