Prostate cancer screening: Continued controversies and novel biomarker advancements.

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Current Urology Pub Date : 2022-12-01 DOI:10.1097/CU9.0000000000000145
Atiyah Tidd-Johnson, Sneha Annie Sebastian, Edzel Lorraine Co, Munaza Afaq, Hansini Kochhar, Mona Sheikh, Arpit Mago, Sujan Poudel, John A Fernandez, Ivan D Rodriguez, Sanjay Razdan
{"title":"Prostate cancer screening: Continued controversies and novel biomarker advancements.","authors":"Atiyah Tidd-Johnson,&nbsp;Sneha Annie Sebastian,&nbsp;Edzel Lorraine Co,&nbsp;Munaza Afaq,&nbsp;Hansini Kochhar,&nbsp;Mona Sheikh,&nbsp;Arpit Mago,&nbsp;Sujan Poudel,&nbsp;John A Fernandez,&nbsp;Ivan D Rodriguez,&nbsp;Sanjay Razdan","doi":"10.1097/CU9.0000000000000145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Prostate cancer (PCa) screening remains one of the most controversial topics in clinical and public health. Despite being the second most common cancer in men worldwide, recommendations for screening using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) are unclear. Early detection and the resulting postscreening treatment lead to overdiagnosis and overtreatment of otherwise indolent cases. In addition, several unwanted harms are associated with PCa screening process. This literature review focuses on the limitations of PSA-specific PCa screening, reasons behind the screening controversy, and the novel biomarkers and advanced innovative methodologies that improve the limitations of traditional screening using PSA. With the verdict of whether or not to screen not yet unanimous, we hope to aid in resolution of the long-standing debate.</p>","PeriodicalId":39147,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology","volume":"16 4","pages":"197-206"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/22/cc/curr-urol-16-197.PMC9875204.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CU9.0000000000000145","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Prostate cancer (PCa) screening remains one of the most controversial topics in clinical and public health. Despite being the second most common cancer in men worldwide, recommendations for screening using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) are unclear. Early detection and the resulting postscreening treatment lead to overdiagnosis and overtreatment of otherwise indolent cases. In addition, several unwanted harms are associated with PCa screening process. This literature review focuses on the limitations of PSA-specific PCa screening, reasons behind the screening controversy, and the novel biomarkers and advanced innovative methodologies that improve the limitations of traditional screening using PSA. With the verdict of whether or not to screen not yet unanimous, we hope to aid in resolution of the long-standing debate.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
前列腺癌筛查:持续的争议和新的生物标志物进展。
前列腺癌(PCa)筛查仍然是临床和公共卫生中最具争议的话题之一。尽管前列腺癌是世界范围内男性中第二大常见癌症,但使用前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)进行筛查的建议尚不明确。早期发现和由此产生的筛查后治疗导致过度诊断和过度治疗其他惰性病例。此外,一些不必要的危害与前列腺癌筛选过程有关。本文综述了PSA特异性前列腺癌筛查的局限性,筛查争议背后的原因,以及新的生物标志物和先进的创新方法,这些方法改善了传统PSA筛查的局限性。由于是否筛选的裁决尚未达成一致,我们希望有助于解决长期以来的辩论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Current Urology
Current Urology Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
96
期刊最新文献
Bilateral nephrolithiasis and upper tract transitional cell carcinoma in horseshoe kidney. Visual guidelines and tutoring in pediatric urological surgery. Hypoxia activates the hypoxia-inducible factor-1α/vascular endothelial growth factor pathway in a prostatic stromal cell line: A mechanism for the pathogenesis of benign prostatic hyperplasia Comparison of midurethral tape with autologous rectus fascial sling surgery for stress urinary incontinence: A systematic review and meta-analysis Partial versus radical nephrectomy for T1b renal cell carcinoma: A comparison of efficacy and prognostic factors based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1