The Interobserver variability of digital rectal examination in a large randomized trial for the screening of prostate cancer

被引:59
|
作者
Gosselaar, C. [1 ]
Kranse, R. [1 ]
Roobol, M. J. [1 ]
Roemeling, S. [1 ]
Schroder, F. H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr, Erasmus MC, Dept Urol, NL-3000 CA Rotterdam, Netherlands
来源
PROSTATE | 2008年 / 68卷 / 09期
关键词
digital rectal examination; interobserver variability; prostate cancer; screening;
D O I
10.1002/pros.20759
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND. To analyze to what extent the percentage of suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE) findings vary between examiners and to what extent the percentage of prostate cancers (PCs) detected in men with these suspicious findings varies between examiners. METHODS. In the first screening round of the European Randomized study of Screening for PC (ERSPC) Rotterdam, 7,280 men underwent a PSA-determination and DRE of whom 2,102 underwent prostate biopsy (biopsy indication PSA >= 4.0 ng/ml and/or suspicious DRE and/or TRUS). Descriptive statistics of DRE-outcome per PSA-range were used to determine the observer variability of six examiners. Because this analysis did not correct properly for other predictors of a suspicious DRE (PSA-level, biopsy indication, TRUS-outcome, prostate volume and age), a logistic regression analysis controlling for these explanatory variables was performed as well. RESULTS. In 2,102 men biopsied, 443 PCs were detected (PPV = 21%). For all PSA levels the percentage suspicious DRE varied between examiners from 4% to 28% and percentage PC detected in men with a suspicious DRE varied from 18% to 36%. Logistic regression analysis showed that three of six examiners considered DRE significantly more often abnormal than others (ORs 3.48, 2.80, 2.47, P < 0.001). For all examiners the odds to have PC was statistically significantly higher in case of a suspicious DRE (ORs 2.21-5.96, P < 0.05). This increased chance to find PC was not significantly observer-dependent. CONCLUSIONS. Three of six examiners considered DRE significantly more often suspicious than the others. However, under equal circumstances a suspicious DRE executed by each examiner increased the chance of the presence of PC similarly.
引用
收藏
页码:985 / 993
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Prostate specific antigen testing and digital rectal examination before and during a randomized trial of screening for prostate cancer:: European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer, Rotterdam
    Beemsterboer, PMM
    de Koning, HJ
    Kranse, R
    Trienekens, PH
    van der Maas, PJ
    Schröder, FH
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2000, 164 (04): : 1216 - 1220
  • [2] Interobserver variability in digital rectal examination of the prostate pre-TRUS biopsy
    Low, K.
    Malone, G.
    Wood, G. A.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2008, 101 : 21 - 21
  • [3] DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION SCREENING FOR PROSTATE-CANCER
    GREEN, L
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1993, 270 (11): : 1315 - 1315
  • [4] INTEROBSERVER VARIATION IN ASSESSMENT OF THE PROSTATE BY DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION
    VARENHORST, E
    BERGLUND, K
    LOFMAN, O
    PEDERSEN, K
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1993, 72 (02): : 173 - 176
  • [5] Prospective evaluation on the effect of interobserver variability of digital rectal examination on the performance of the Rotterdam Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator
    Pereira-Azevedo, Nuno
    Braga, Isaac
    Verbeek, Jan F. M.
    Osorio, Luis
    Cavadas, Vitor
    Fraga, Avelino
    Carrasquinho, Eduardo
    de Oliveira, Eduardo Cardoso
    Nieboer, Daan
    Roobol, Monique J.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2017, 24 (12) : 826 - 832
  • [6] Evaluation of the digital rectal examination as a screening test for prostate cancer
    Schroder, FH
    van der Maas, P
    Beemsterboer, P
    Kruger, AB
    Hoedemaeker, R
    Rietbergen, J
    Kranse, R
    JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 1998, 90 (23): : 1817 - 1823
  • [7] Digital Rectal Examination Is Not a Useful Screening Test for Prostate Cancer
    Krilaviciute, Agne
    Becker, Nikolaus
    Lakes, Jale
    Radtke, Jan Philipp
    Kuczyk, Markus
    Peters, Inga
    Harke, Nina N.
    Koerber, Stefan A.
    Herkommer, Kathleen
    Gschwend, Jurgen E.
    Meissner, Valentin H.
    Benner, Axel
    Seibold, Petra
    Kristiansen, Glen
    Hadaschik, Boris
    Arsov, Christian
    Schimmoeller, Lars
    Giesel, Frederik Lars
    Antoch, Gerald
    Makowski, Marcus
    Wacker, Frank
    Schlemmer, Heinz-Peter
    Kaaks, Rudolf
    Albers, Peter
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2023, 6 (06): : 566 - 573
  • [8] Underutilization of digital rectal examination when screening for prostate cancer
    Murthy, GD
    Byron, DP
    Pasquale, D
    ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2004, 164 (03) : 313 - 316
  • [9] INTEREXAMINER VARIABILITY OF DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION IN DETECTING PROSTATE-CANCER
    SMITH, DS
    CATALONA, WJ
    UROLOGY, 1995, 45 (01) : 70 - 74
  • [10] THE ADDED VALUE OF DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION IN PROSTATE CANCER SCREENING AND OUTCOMES
    Pierorazio, Phillip
    Walsh, Patrick
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2011, 185 (04): : E812 - E812