Search

Simple Summary: Controversy exists regarding prostate cancer (PC) screening using the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. It may reduce PC mortality risk but is associated with false-positive results. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of false-positive and false-negative results in a general clinical setting and the associated variables. We found a high rate of false-positive results (46.6%), resulting in a positive predictive value of 12.7%. Patients also showed a low rate of false-negative results (3.7%) with a negative predictive value of 99.5%. Age, alcohol intake, and having a urinary tract infection were associated with a higher probability of false-positive results; having diabetes mellitus type II was associated with a lower rate of false-positive results. This study showed a higher rate of false-positive results in clinical practice than in previous clinical trials, mainly in patients over 60 years. (1) Background: There are no real-world data evaluating the incidence of false-positive results. We analyzed the clinical and analytical factors associated with the presence of false-positive results in PSA determinations in practice. (2) Methods: A prospective cohort study of patients with a PSA test was performed in clinical practice. We followed the patients by reviewing their medical records for 2 years or until the diagnosis of PCa was reached, whichever came first. (3) Results: False-positive PSA rate was 46.8% (95% CI 44.2–49.2%) and false-negative PSA rate was 2.8% (95% CI 2–3.5%). Patients aged 61–70 years and those over 70 years were more likely to have a false-positive result than those under 45 years (aOR 2.83, 95% CI 1.06–7.55, p = 0.038, and aOR 4.62, 95% CI 1.75–12.22, p = 0.002, respectively). Patients with urinary tract infection were more likely to have a false-positive result (aOR 8.42, 95% CI 2.42–29.34, p = 0.001). Patients with diabetes mellitus were less likely to have a false-positive result (aOR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41–0.98, p = 0.038); (4) Conclusions: This study has generated relevant information that could be very useful for shared decision making in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]