{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03777148253068933, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03918791312559018, 'mean_word_length': 4.461340206185567, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Retrospective evaluation of PSA density for selection of biopsy candidates with prostate specific antigen in the gray zone].

PURPOSE
We examined the usefulness of prostate specific antigen density (PSAD) for selection of biopsy candidate with prostate specific antigen levels between 4.1 and 10.0 ng./ml. in prostate cancer screening retrospectively.


MATERIALS AND METHODS
The screening was conducted on male candidates in Natori city, aged 55 years or older, for 6 years from 1994 through 1999. We could analyze serum PSA levels and PSA density in 118 men with PSA levels between 4.1 and 10.0 ng./ml. All of 118 men underwent ultrasound guided systematic prostate biopsy regardless of findings of digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasound. Prostate volume was estimated by transrectal ultrasound measurements using the prolate ellipse formula (pi/6 x length x width x height). PSAD was calculated by dividing serum PSA level by prostate volume. Serum PSA levels were determined by Tandem-R assay.


RESULTS
In 118 men, twenty-five men had prostate cancer. There was no significant difference in mean PSA between those with prostate cancer and those without prostate cancer, but the difference was significant in the mean PSA density (mean 0.26 and 0.16, respectively, p < 0.0001). Receiver operating characteristic curves for PSA and PSAD demonstrated superior benefit for PSAD in 118 men. A sensitivity, a specificity, a positive predictive value and a negative predictive value of PSAD cut-off of 0.15 were 88%, 52.7%, 33.3% and 94.2%. PSAD cut-off of 0.18 showed the highest sum of sensitivity and specificity, which gave a sensitivity of 80%, a specificity of 72%, a positive predictive value of 43.5% and a negative predictive value of 93.1%. PSAD cut-off of 0.15 would seem to be preferable to cut-off of 0.18 because of less cancer missing.


CONCLUSIONS
Although further studies are needed to determine optimal cut-off value to be used in clinical practice, PASD seems to be useful for the selection of biopsy candidates with PSA levels of 4.1 to 10.0 ng./ml. in the prostate cancer screening.