PSA Standardization

Effect on "Watchful Waiting"

October 2009

Lowering that cutoff allows the curves to be superimposed, and a positive result to occur at the same time point regardless of whether a Hybritech or WHO assay is used.  Obviously this is a very generic representation of the clinical impact but is a concrete illustration of the analytical differences.

< Previous Slide

Watchful Waiting

Next Slide >

 

Jump to section:

• Introduction
• Elevated PSA Result on Screening
• Reasons for Ordering PSA¹
• PSA Screening in the News
• Recommendations for Screening
• Arguments for Screening for Prostate Cancer
• Recommendations for Not Screening
• Arguments Against Screening for Prostate Cancer
• PSA Sensitivity and Specificity
• High-Grade Prostate Cancer is Not Rare When PSA =4.0 ng/mL⁶
• Increase Specificity Using PSA Velocity⁸
• Optimizing Clinical Sensitivity and Specificity: Age/Ethnic Reference Intervals^9,10
• Utilization of Free/Total PSA Ratio¹¹
• Why Aren't PSA Results Interchangeable?
• Development of PSA Standards
• Development of PSA Standards
• Effect of Analytical Bias on Classification Based on Fixed Criteria
• Analytical Difference: Results per 1000 Patients Tested¹³
• Hybritech vs. WHO Standardized Assays^12,14
• Analytical Differences¹⁵
• CAP Proficiency Testing
• WHO 96/670 Total PSA Preparations¹⁶
• WHO Calibration/Concordance at 3.1 ng/mL Cutoff⁵
• WHO Calibration/Concordance at 3.1 ng/mL Cutoff⁵
• WHO Calibration/Concordance at 4.0 ng/mL Cutoff⁵
• Clinical Differences in PSA Screening¹⁴
• The Clinical Difference
• Fixed Thresholds Produce Problems for Biopsy Recommendations
• Effect on "Watchful Waiting"
• Effect on "Watchful Waiting"
• Adding Biological Variability into the Mix
• Futures in Prostate Cancer Testing?
• PSA Testing at Mayo
• Conclusions
• References
• References
• Questions?