1
they recommend biopsy for men 50 to 59 years old if either cutoff is exceeded or only if both are exceeded. Additionally, in the original submitted article 50% of men who had a PSAV of 0 or less were excluded from analysis, and approx- imately 30% of those with cancer had no increasing PSA. It is not clear to what extent these exclusions could have in- flated test performances. I believe that given the limitations of absolute PSA levels to exclude the presence of cancer (reference 4 in article), PSAV will be an important risk assessment tool that provides infor- mation regarding the presence of life threatening disease in men with PSA less than the traditional cutoff of 4.0 ng/ml. Just as PSA is a better predictor of cancer in younger men with- out BPH, as the authors have shown so is PSAV. The most important remaining question is whether our efforts to de- tect more cancer by lowering test thresholds will lead to improved overall health outcomes for men. H. Ballentine Carter Department of Urology Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Baltimore, Maryland REPLY BY AUTHORS Carter, a respected authority and first to write about the clinical usefulness of PSAV, raises an excellent question of whether the exclusion of men with PSAV of 0 or less inflated the test performance of age adjusted PSAV. We discussed this question several times when the analysis was per- formed, and we actually performed both analyses (including and excluding men with PSAV of 0 or less). The changing patterns of sensitivity and specificity among different age groups from the 2 methods were similar. The decision to exclude men with PSAV of 0 or less was based on several factors. 1) In contrast to PSA, which almost always has a value meaningful to a urologist, the clinical meaning of PSAV is less clear-cut, especially when PSAV is 0 or less. 2) If PSAV is 0 or less, urologists will use PSA alone to evaluate the risk of cancer. 3) Exclusion or inclusion of PSAV of 0 or less has the same meaning for the urologist. 4) Exclusion or inclusion of PSAV of 0 or less delivered the same message that PSAV should be age adjusted, a key finding of this study. AGE ADJUSTED PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN CUT POINTS 504

Reply by Authors

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Reply by Authors

they recommend biopsy for men 50 to 59 years old if eithercutoff is exceeded or only if both are exceeded. Additionally,in the original submitted article 50% of men who had aPSAV of 0 or less were excluded from analysis, and approx-imately 30% of those with cancer had no increasing PSA. Itis not clear to what extent these exclusions could have in-flated test performances.

I believe that given the limitations of absolute PSA levels toexclude the presence of cancer (reference 4 in article), PSAVwill be an important risk assessment tool that provides infor-mation regarding the presence of life threatening disease inmen with PSA less than the traditional cutoff of 4.0 ng/ml. Justas PSA is a better predictor of cancer in younger men with-out BPH, as the authors have shown so is PSAV. The mostimportant remaining question is whether our efforts to de-tect more cancer by lowering test thresholds will lead toimproved overall health outcomes for men.

H. Ballentine CarterDepartment of Urology

Johns Hopkins School of MedicineBaltimore, Maryland

REPLY BY AUTHORS

Carter, a respected authority and first to write about theclinical usefulness of PSAV, raises an excellent question ofwhether the exclusion of men with PSAV of 0 or less inflatedthe test performance of age adjusted PSAV. We discussedthis question several times when the analysis was per-formed, and we actually performed both analyses (includingand excluding men with PSAV of 0 or less). The changingpatterns of sensitivity and specificity among different agegroups from the 2 methods were similar. The decision toexclude men with PSAV of 0 or less was based on severalfactors. 1) In contrast to PSA, which almost always has avalue meaningful to a urologist, the clinical meaning ofPSAV is less clear-cut, especially when PSAV is 0 or less. 2)If PSAV is 0 or less, urologists will use PSA alone to evaluatethe risk of cancer. 3) Exclusion or inclusion of PSAV of 0 orless has the same meaning for the urologist. 4) Exclusion orinclusion of PSAV of 0 or less delivered the same messagethat PSAV should be age adjusted, a key finding of thisstudy.

AGE ADJUSTED PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN CUT POINTS504