These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [The diagnostic value of the radioimmunological estimation of prostatic acid phosphatase. Comparative value of the measurement of enzyme activity (author's transl)].
    Author: Tellier JL, Chatal JF, Bourdin S, Auvigne J, Etienne P, Faye R.
    Journal: J Urol (Paris); 1981; 87(3):169-73. PubMed ID: 7240777.
    Abstract:
    Radioimmunological estimation of prostatic acid phosphatase was carried out in 72 reference subjects, 46 patients with benign prostatic hypertrophy, 106 patients with untreated prostatic carcinoma and 25 patients with a carcinoma of some other origin. The mean concentration in non-acidified serum was 1.3 +/- 0.4 (M +/- SD) ng/ml for the reference group and 1.6 +/- 0.8 ng/ml for the benign hypertrophy group. The upper limit of discriminatory values for the diagnosis of prostatic carcinoma was fixed at 3 ng/ml. Taking this value, the overall percentage of positive results for carcinoma of the prostate was 61% (65/106). The number of cases with a value greater than 3 ng/ml was 3/18 (17%) for stage A, 8/27 (30%) for stage B, 7/13 (54%) for stage C and 47/48 (98%) for stage D. 8% (2/25) of carcinomas of another origin gave a positive result. The results of estimation using the radioimmunological technique were compared with those obtained by the measurement of enzyme activity using para nitro-phenyl phosphate as a substrate in 34 untreated prostatic carcinomas (all stages mixed together). When measurements by both techniques were carried out under the same ideal conditions using fresh sera as soon as possible after the blood was drawn, the result was abnormal in 10 cases out of 12 (83%) for the radioimmunological method and in 8 cases out of 12 (67%) for the measurement of enzyme activity. By contrast, under routine conditions, the positive percentage figures were 77% (17/22) for the radioimmunological technique and only 36% (8/22) for the measurement of enzyme activity. It would thus appear that radioimmunological measurement is more reliable than the measurement of enzyme activity.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]