The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Prostate Specific Antigen Best Practice Statement: 2009 Update
Abstract
PURPOSE: We provide current information on the use of PSA testing for the evaluation of men at risk for prostate cancer, and the risks and benefits of early detection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The report is a summary of the American Urological Association PSA Best Practice Policy 2009. The summary statement is based on a review of the current professional literature, clinical experience and the expert opinions of a multispecialty panel. It is intended to serve as a resource for physicians, other health care professionals, and patients. It does not establish a fixed set of guidelines, define the legal standard of care or pre-empt physician judgment in individual cases. RESULTS: There are two notable differences in the current policy. First, the age for obtaining a baseline PSA has been lowered to 40 years. Secondly, the current policy no longer recommends a single, threshold value of PSA, which should prompt prostate biopsy. Rather, the decision to proceed to prostate biopsy should be based primarily on PSA and DRE results, but should take into account multiple factors including free and total PSA, patient age, PSA velocity, PSA density, family history, ethnicity, prior biopsy history and comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Although recently published trials show different results regarding the impact of prostate cancer screening on mortality, both suggest that prostate cancer screening leads to overdetection and overtreatment of some patients. Therefore, men should be informed of the risks and benefits of prostate cancer screening before biopsy and the option of active surveillance in lieu of immediate treatment for certain men diagnosed with prostate cancer.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Jemal, A., Siegel, R., Ward, E., Murray, T., Xu, J., & Thun, M. J. (2007) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/canjclin.57.1.43 · Cited by 7,439
Docetaxel plus Prednisone or Mitoxantrone plus Prednisone for Advanced Prostate Cancer
Tannock, I. F., de Wit, R., Berry, W. R., Horti, J., Pluzanska, A., Chi, K. N., Oudard, S., Théodore, C., James, N. D., Turesson, I., et al. (2004) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa040720 · Cited by 5,735
Noninvasive detection of clinically occult lymph-node metastases in prostate cancer
Harisinghani, M. G., Barentsz, J., Hahn, P. F., Deserno, W. M., Tabatabaei, S., van de Kaa, C. H., de la Rosette, J., & Weissleder, R. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa022749 · Cited by 1,971
Radical Prostatectomy versus Watchful Waiting in Early Prostate Cancer
Bill-Axelson, A., Holmberg, L., Ruutu, M., Häggman, M., Andersson, S.-O., Bratell, S., Spångberg, A., Busch, C., Nordling, S., Garmo, H., et al. (2005) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa043739 · Cited by 1,111
Cited by
Bhasin, S., Cunningham, G. R., Hayes, F. J., Matsumoto, A. M., Snyder, P. J., Swerdloff, R. S., & Montori, V. M. (2010) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/jc.2009-2354 · Cited by 1,954
American Cancer Society Guideline for the Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: Update 2010
Wolf, A. M. D., Wender, R. C., Etzioni, R. B., Thompson, I. M., D'Amico, A. V., Volk, R. J., Brooks, D. D., Dash, C., Guessous, I., Andrews, K., et al. (2010) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.20066 · Cited by 965
Ficarra, V., Novara, G., Ahlering, T. E., Costello, A., Eastham, J. A., Graefen, M., Guazzoni, G., Menon, M., Mottrie, A., Patel, V. R., et al. (2012) · European Urology · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.046 · Cited by 786
Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Review of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
Chou, R., Croswell, J. M., Dana, T., Bougatsos, C., Blazina, I., Fu, R., Gleitsmann, K., Koenig, H. C., Lam, C., Maltz, A., et al. (2011) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-155-11-201112060-00375 · Cited by 573
Prostate cancer as a model for tumour immunotherapy
Drake, C. G. (2010) · Nature Reviews Immunology · doi:10.1038/nri2817 · Cited by 347
Metadata
- Authors
- Greene, K. L., Albertsen, P. C., Babaian, R. J., Carter, H. B., Gann, P. H., Han, M., Kuban, D. A., Sartor, A. O., Stanford, J. L., Zietman, A., & Carroll, P.
- Venue
- Journal of Urology
- Published
- 2009-11
- Volume
- 182
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 2232-2241
- ISSN
- 0022-5347 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-3792
- OpenAlex
- W2136804662
- Cited by
- 517
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 57.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prostate Specific Antigen Best Practice Statement: 2009 Update. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.juro.2009.07.093
- The paper
- Greene, K. L., Albertsen, P. C., Babaian, R. J., Carter, H. B., Gann, P. H., Han, M., Kuban, D. A., Sartor, A. O., Stanford, J. L., Zietman, A., & Carroll, P. (2009). Prostate Specific Antigen Best Practice Statement: 2009 Update. Journal of Urology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.07.093
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.