Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Advances in Therapy 9/2018

Open Access 01-09-2018 | Review

Prostate Cancer in Primary Care

Authors: Samuel W. D. Merriel, Garth Funston, Willie Hamilton

Published in: Advances in Therapy | Issue 9/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Prostate cancer is a common malignancy seen worldwide. The incidence has risen in recent decades, mainly fuelled by more widespread use of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, although prostate cancer mortality rates have remained relatively static over that time period. A man’s risk of prostate cancer is affected by his age and family history of the disease. Men with prostate cancer generally present symptomatically in primary care settings, although some diagnoses are made in asymptomatic men undergoing opportunistic PSA screening. Symptoms traditionally thought to correlate with prostate cancer include lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), such as nocturia and poor urinary stream, erectile dysfunction and visible haematuria. However, there is significant crossover in symptoms between prostate cancer and benign conditions affecting the prostate such as benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) and prostatitis, making it very challenging to distinguish between them on the basis of symptoms. The evidence for the performance of PSA in asymptomatic and symptomatic men for the diagnosis of prostate cancer is equivocal. PSA is subject to false positive and false negative results, affecting its clinical utility as a standalone test. Clinicians need to counsel men about the risks and benefits of PSA testing to inform their decision-making. Digital rectal examination (DRE) by primary care clinicians has some evidence to show discrimination between benign and malignant conditions affecting the prostate. Patients referred to secondary care for diagnostic testing for prostate cancer will typically undergo a transrectal or transperineal biopsy, where a number of samples are taken and sent for histological examination. These biopsies are invasive procedures with side effects and a risk of infection and sepsis, and alternative tests such as multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) are currently being trialled for their accuracy and safety in diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, et al. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon. 2013. http://globocan.iarc.fr. Accessed 24 May 2018. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, et al. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon. 2013. http://​globocan.​iarc.​fr. Accessed 24 May 2018.
2.
go back to reference Grossman DC, Curry SJ, Owens DK, et al. Screening for prostate cancer: US Preventive services task force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2018;319(18):1901–13.CrossRef Grossman DC, Curry SJ, Owens DK, et al. Screening for prostate cancer: US Preventive services task force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2018;319(18):1901–13.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Jones D, Friend C, Dreher A, Allgar V, Macleod U. The diagnostic test accuracy of rectal examination for prostate cancer diagnosis in symptomatic patients: a systematic review. BMC Fam Pract. 2018;19:79.CrossRef Jones D, Friend C, Dreher A, Allgar V, Macleod U. The diagnostic test accuracy of rectal examination for prostate cancer diagnosis in symptomatic patients: a systematic review. BMC Fam Pract. 2018;19:79.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Kiciński M, Vangronsveld J, Nawrot TS. An epidemiological reappraisal of the familial aggregation of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2011;6(10):1–7.CrossRef Kiciński M, Vangronsveld J, Nawrot TS. An epidemiological reappraisal of the familial aggregation of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2011;6(10):1–7.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Fachal L, Gõmez-Caamaño A, Celeiro-Muñoz C, et al. BRCA1 mutations do not increase prostate cancer risk: results from a meta-analysis including new data. Prostate. 2011;71(16):1768–79.CrossRef Fachal L, Gõmez-Caamaño A, Celeiro-Muñoz C, et al. BRCA1 mutations do not increase prostate cancer risk: results from a meta-analysis including new data. Prostate. 2011;71(16):1768–79.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Leongamornlert D, Mahmud N, Tymrakiewicz M, et al. Germline BRCA1 mutations increase prostate cancer risk. Br J Cancer. 2012;106(10):1697–701.CrossRef Leongamornlert D, Mahmud N, Tymrakiewicz M, et al. Germline BRCA1 mutations increase prostate cancer risk. Br J Cancer. 2012;106(10):1697–701.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Ryan S, Jenkins MA, Win AK. Risk of prostate cancer in lynch syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2014;23(3):437–49.CrossRef Ryan S, Jenkins MA, Win AK. Risk of prostate cancer in lynch syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2014;23(3):437–49.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Evans S, Metcalfe C, Ibrahim F, Persad R, Ben-Shlomo Y. Investigating Black–White differences in prostate cancer prognosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cancer. 2008;123(2):430–5.CrossRef Evans S, Metcalfe C, Ibrahim F, Persad R, Ben-Shlomo Y. Investigating Black–White differences in prostate cancer prognosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cancer. 2008;123(2):430–5.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Ben-Shlomo Y, Evans S, Ibrahim F, et al. The risk of prostate cancer amongst black men in the United Kingdom: the PROCESS Cohort Study. Eur Urol. 2008;53(1):99–105.CrossRef Ben-Shlomo Y, Evans S, Ibrahim F, et al. The risk of prostate cancer amongst black men in the United Kingdom: the PROCESS Cohort Study. Eur Urol. 2008;53(1):99–105.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Sakr W, Haas G, Cassin B, Pontes J, Crissman J. The frequency of carcinoma and intraepithelial neoplasia of the prostate in young male patients. J Urol. 1993;150:379–85.CrossRef Sakr W, Haas G, Cassin B, Pontes J, Crissman J. The frequency of carcinoma and intraepithelial neoplasia of the prostate in young male patients. J Urol. 1993;150:379–85.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Rosen R, Altwein J, Boyle P, et al. Lower urinary tract symptoms and male sexual dysfunction: the multinational survey of the aging male (MSAM-7). Eur Urol. 2003;44(6):637–49.CrossRef Rosen R, Altwein J, Boyle P, et al. Lower urinary tract symptoms and male sexual dysfunction: the multinational survey of the aging male (MSAM-7). Eur Urol. 2003;44(6):637–49.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Martin RM, Vatten L, Gunnell D, Romundstad P, Nilsen TIL. Lower urinary tract symptoms and risk of prostate cancer: the HUNT 2 cohort, Norway. Int J Cancer. 2008;123(8):1924–8.CrossRef Martin RM, Vatten L, Gunnell D, Romundstad P, Nilsen TIL. Lower urinary tract symptoms and risk of prostate cancer: the HUNT 2 cohort, Norway. Int J Cancer. 2008;123(8):1924–8.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Whellan DJ, Ellis SJ, Kraus WE, et al. The effect of benign lower urinary tract symptoms on subsequent prostate cancer testing and diagnosis. Eur Urol. 2013;63(6):1021–7.CrossRef Whellan DJ, Ellis SJ, Kraus WE, et al. The effect of benign lower urinary tract symptoms on subsequent prostate cancer testing and diagnosis. Eur Urol. 2013;63(6):1021–7.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Bhindi A, Bhindi B, Kulkarni GS, et al. Modern-day prostate cancer is not meaningfully associated with lower urinary tract symptoms: analysis of a propensity score-matched cohort. J Can Urol Assoc. 2017;11(1–2):41–6.CrossRef Bhindi A, Bhindi B, Kulkarni GS, et al. Modern-day prostate cancer is not meaningfully associated with lower urinary tract symptoms: analysis of a propensity score-matched cohort. J Can Urol Assoc. 2017;11(1–2):41–6.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Bruyninckx R, Buntinx F, Aertgeerts B, Van Casteren V. The diagnostic value of macroscopic haematuria for the diagnosis of urological cancer in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 2003;53(486):31–5.PubMedPubMedCentral Bruyninckx R, Buntinx F, Aertgeerts B, Van Casteren V. The diagnostic value of macroscopic haematuria for the diagnosis of urological cancer in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 2003;53(486):31–5.PubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Gan JH, Harris AC, Green JSA. Quantifying the risk of malignancy in patients with visible haematuria presenting to the emergency department. J Clin Urol. 2015;8(2):132–8.CrossRef Gan JH, Harris AC, Green JSA. Quantifying the risk of malignancy in patients with visible haematuria presenting to the emergency department. J Clin Urol. 2015;8(2):132–8.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Carter B, Albertsen P, Barry M, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA guideline. Linthicum: American Urological Association Education and Research; 2018. p. 1–28. Carter B, Albertsen P, Barry M, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA guideline. Linthicum: American Urological Association Education and Research; 2018. p. 1–28.
32.
go back to reference Heijnsdijk EAM, Bangma CH, Borràs JM, et al. Summary statement on screening for prostate cancer in Europe. Int J Cancer. 2018;142(4):741–6.CrossRef Heijnsdijk EAM, Bangma CH, Borràs JM, et al. Summary statement on screening for prostate cancer in Europe. Int J Cancer. 2018;142(4):741–6.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Martin RM, Donovan JL, Turner EL, et al. Effect of a low-intensity PSA-based screening intervention on prostate cancer mortality: the CAP randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2018;319(9):883–95.CrossRef Martin RM, Donovan JL, Turner EL, et al. Effect of a low-intensity PSA-based screening intervention on prostate cancer mortality: the CAP randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2018;319(9):883–95.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Pinsky PF, Prorok PC, Yu K, et al. Extended mortality results for prostate cancer screening in the PLCO trial with median follow-up of 15 years. Cancer. 2017;123(4):592–9.CrossRef Pinsky PF, Prorok PC, Yu K, et al. Extended mortality results for prostate cancer screening in the PLCO trial with median follow-up of 15 years. Cancer. 2017;123(4):592–9.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Vedanayagam M, Kumar A, Madaan S. Lower urinary tract symptoms in an older man. BMJ. 2017;357:j1493.CrossRef Vedanayagam M, Kumar A, Madaan S. Lower urinary tract symptoms in an older man. BMJ. 2017;357:j1493.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Schmid HP, Prikler L, Sturgeon CM, Semjonow A. Diagnosis of prostate cancer: the clinical use of prostate specific antigen. EAU Update Ser. 2003;1(1):3–8.CrossRef Schmid HP, Prikler L, Sturgeon CM, Semjonow A. Diagnosis of prostate cancer: the clinical use of prostate specific antigen. EAU Update Ser. 2003;1(1):3–8.CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Ilic D, Jammal W, Chiarelli P, et al. Assessing the effectiveness of decision aids for decision making in prostate cancer testing: a systematic review. Psychooncology. 2015;24(10):1303–15.CrossRef Ilic D, Jammal W, Chiarelli P, et al. Assessing the effectiveness of decision aids for decision making in prostate cancer testing: a systematic review. Psychooncology. 2015;24(10):1303–15.CrossRef
41.
go back to reference Kranse R, Roobol M, Schröder FH. A graphical device to represent the outcomes of a logistic regression analysis. Prostate. 2008;68(15):1674–80.CrossRef Kranse R, Roobol M, Schröder FH. A graphical device to represent the outcomes of a logistic regression analysis. Prostate. 2008;68(15):1674–80.CrossRef
43.
go back to reference Poyet C, Nieboer D, Bhindi B, et al. Prostate cancer risk prediction using the novel versions of the European Randomised Study for Screening of Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) risk calculators: independent validation and comparison in a contemporary Europe. BJU Int. 2016;117(3):401–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13314.CrossRef Poyet C, Nieboer D, Bhindi B, et al. Prostate cancer risk prediction using the novel versions of the European Randomised Study for Screening of Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) risk calculators: independent validation and comparison in a contemporary Europe. BJU Int. 2016;117(3):401–8. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​bju.​13314.CrossRef
46.
go back to reference Boesen L, Norgaard N, Logager V, et al. Assessment of the diagnostic accuracy of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer in biopsy-naive men: the biparametric MRI for detection of prostate cancer (BIDOC) study. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1(2). Boesen L, Norgaard N, Logager V, et al. Assessment of the diagnostic accuracy of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer in biopsy-naive men: the biparametric MRI for detection of prostate cancer (BIDOC) study. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1(2).
Metadata
Title
Prostate Cancer in Primary Care
Authors
Samuel W. D. Merriel
Garth Funston
Willie Hamilton
Publication date
01-09-2018
Publisher
Springer Healthcare Communications
Published in
Advances in Therapy / Issue 9/2018
Print ISSN: 0741-238X
Electronic ISSN: 1865-8652
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-018-0766-1

Other articles of this Issue 9/2018

Advances in Therapy 9/2018 Go to the issue