MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cross sectional study looked at prostate cancer patients seen in the Urology Departments in 2 tertiary centres over the 11 year period starting from January 2000 to May 2011. Patient demographic data, levels of PSA at diagnosis, Gleason score for the biopsy core, T-staging as well as the lymph node status were recorded and analysed.
RESULTS: 258 men were included. The mean age of those 90 men (34.9%) with bone metastasis was 69.2 ± 7.3 years. Logistic regression found that PSA level (P=0.000) at diagnosis and patient's nodal-stage (P=0.02) were the only two independent variables able to predict the probability of bone metastasis among the newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients. Among those with a low PSA level less than 20 ng/ml, and less than 10 ng/ml, bone metastasis were detected in 10.3% (12 out of 117) and 9.7% (7 out of 72), respectively. However, by combining PSA level of 10 ng/ml or lower, and nodal negative as the two criteria to predict negative bone scan, a relatively high negative predictive value of 93.8% was obtained. The probability of bone metastasis in prostate cancer can be calculated with this formula: -1.069+0.007(PSA value, ng/ml) +1.021(Nodal status, 0 or 1)=x Probability of bone metastasis=2.718 x/1+2.718 x.
CONCLUSION: Newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients with a PSA level of 10 ng/ml or lower and negative nodes have a very low risk of bone metastasis (negative predictive value 93.8%) and therefore bone scans may not be necessary.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with haematuria and/or past history of urothelial cancer on follow-up had their voided urine tested with FISH. Patients then underwent cystoscopy/ ureteroscopy and any lesions seen were biopsied. The histopathological reports of the bladder or ureteroscopic mucosal biopsies were then compared with the FISH test results.
RESULTS: Two hundred sixty patients were recruited. The sensitivity and specificity of the FISH test was 89.2% and 83.4% respectively. The positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) were 47.1% and 97.9%. By excluding patients who had positive deletion of chromosome 9, the overall results of the screening test improved: sensitivity 84.6%; specificity 96.4%; PPV 75.9% and NPV 97.9%.
CONCLUSIONS: UroVysion FISH has a high specificity of detecting urothelial cancer or dysplasia when deletion of chromosome 9 is excluded. Negative UroVysion FISH-tests may allow us to conserve health resources and minimize trauma by deferring cystoscopic or ureteroscopic examination.