Session on Prostate Cancer Screening

Newswise — A poster session on "Prostate Cancer Screening" took place at the EAU on Thursday March 22, 2007. Two posters from this session are covered herein.

Dr. Schroeder, Rotterdam presented a poster "How to Screen for Prostate Cancer (PC) in Men presenting with Low PSA (less than 3.0ng/ml) - Do We Have to Find All Cancers?" The study sought to study the characteristics of men detected with PC in the low PSA range. In the Rotterdam screening project, 15,852 men were screened and 79% presented with a PSA less than 3.0ng/ml at the first screen. The PC found in men by screening after 4 and 8 years and intervening intervals was characterized. Interval PC was diagnosed in 14 men during year 0-4, 2 were >stage T2 and thus potentially incurable. During the 2nd screen, at 4 years, 1,090 showed PSA progression to >3.0ng/ml and were biopsied. PC was detected in 275 (25%) and 7 were potentially incurable (including 2 metastatic cases). Dr. Schroeder concludes that it is acceptable to delay the need to diagnose PC in the PSA range <3.0ng/ml as >95% of cases detected as interval PC or after PSA progression are still potentially confined and curable.

EAU 2007 - Abstract#606-(How to Screen for Prostate Cancer (PC) in Men Presenting with Low PSA (less than 3.0 ng/mL)? Do We Have to Find All Cancers?)http://www.urotoday.com/264/conference_reports/eau_2007_abstracts__72_prostate_cancer_screenin/eau_2007_abst606__how_to_screen_for_prostate_cancer_pc_in_men_presenting_with_low_psa__30_ngml__do_we_have_to_find_all_cancers.html

Dr. Pelzer, Innsbruck presented data that the pathologic characteristics of PC detected in screened patients is favorable compared to PC detected in non-screened men. Of 997 RPs performed 1999-2006, 806 men were treated for screen detected PC and 191 were referred for surgery and not screen detected. Patient age and PSA levels were similar between the groups. The screen detected patients had statistically lower pathologic stages at surgery and lower Gleason scores. The rate of positive surgical margins was 11.7% in the screened group and 24.4% in the non-screened group. The worse pathologic variables suggest that the non-screened group is at higher risk for disease relapse compared to the screened patients.

EAU 2007 - Abstract#611-(Clinical and Pathological Features of Screen vs. Non Screen Detected Prostate Cancers: Is There a Difference?)http://www.urotoday.com/264/conference_reports/eau_2007_abstracts__72_prostate_cancer_screenin/eau_2007_abst611__clinical_and_pathological_features_of_screen_vs_non_screen_detected_prostate_cancers_is_there_a_difference.html

By Christopher P. Evans, MD

About UroTodayUroToday.com attracts more than 45,000 readers monthly. The website covers over 22 urology disease categories and provides the most in depth Urological conference reports available online. UroToday.com is the world leader in delivering a quality, global online publication providing accurate and timely education that is clinically relevant in the practice of Urology. All scientific content is developed by urologists committed to translating research into clinically relevant science, including all genitourinary cancers, pediatric and geriatric urological dysfunctions for urologists, medical oncologists and advanced nurse practitioners.