Literature DB >> 15770007

Prostate Cancer Screening in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial: findings from the initial screening round of a randomized trial.

Gerald L Andriole1, David L Levin, E David Crawford, Edward P Gelmann, Paul F Pinsky, David Chia, Barnett S Kramer, Douglas Reding, Timothy R Church, Robert L Grubb, Grant Izmirlian, Lawrence R Ragard, Jonathan D Clapp, Philip C Prorok, John K Gohagan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The benefit of screening for prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and digital rectal examination (DRE) is uncertain and is under evaluation in a randomized prospective trial, the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial. Although the final results are several years away, the initial round of screening is complete. We describe the population enrolled in the PLCO trial, their baseline PSA and DRE screening results, and diagnostic follow-up results during the first year of follow-up.
METHODS: A total of 38,350 men were randomly assigned to the screening arm of the PLCO trial from November 1993 through June 2001. Men were advised to seek diagnostic follow-up from their primary care provider if their DRE was suspicious for cancer and/or if their serum PSA level was higher than 4 ng/mL. PLCO trial staff obtained records related to diagnostic follow-up.
RESULTS: Compliance with both screening tests was high (more than 89%). At screening, 7.5% of men had a positive DRE (i.e., suspicious for cancer) and 7.9% had a PSA level higher than 4 ng/mL. Of the men with positive screening tests, 74.2% underwent additional diagnostic testing, and 31.5% underwent a prostatic biopsy within 1 year. Overall, 1.4% of the men in the screening arm were diagnosed with prostate cancer, the majority of whom had clinically localized cancer. These compliance, biopsy, and cancer detection rates appear to be representative of contemporary practice patterns.
CONCLUSION: The PLCO trial is evaluating PSA- and DRE-based screening for prostate cancer in a clinically valid manner. Whether such screening will result in a reduction of prostate cancer mortality cannot be answered until the randomized comparison is completed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15770007     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dji065

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  54 in total

1.  Calibrating disease progression models using population data: a critical precursor to policy development in cancer control.

Authors:  Roman Gulati; Lurdes Inoue; Jeffrey Katcher; William Hazelton; Ruth Etzioni
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2010-06-07       Impact factor: 5.899

Review 2.  Best practice in primary care pathology: review 4.

Authors:  W S A Smellie; J Forth; S Sundar; E Kalu; C A M McNulty; E Sherriff; I D Watson; C Croucher; T M Reynolds; P J Carey
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2006-05-19       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Should Canadians be offered systematic prostate cancer screening? No.

Authors:  Michel Labrecque; France Légaré; Michel Cauchon
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 4.  Cancer screening in renal transplant recipients: what is the evidence?

Authors:  Germaine Wong; Jeremy R Chapman; Jonathan C Craig
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 8.237

5.  [Early detection of prostate cancer in Germany. A study of a representative random sample of the population].

Authors:  M Sieverding; U Matterne; L Ciccarello; H-J Luboldt
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 6.  Prostate-specific antigen in the early detection of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ian M Thompson; Donna P Ankerst
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2007-06-19       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  National Cancer Institute Patient Navigation Research Program: methods, protocol, and measures.

Authors:  Karen M Freund; Tracy A Battaglia; Elizabeth Calhoun; Donald J Dudley; Kevin Fiscella; Electra Paskett; Peter C Raich; Richard G Roetzheim
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-12-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial.

Authors:  Gerald L Andriole; E David Crawford; Robert L Grubb; Saundra S Buys; David Chia; Timothy R Church; Mona N Fouad; Edward P Gelmann; Paul A Kvale; Douglas J Reding; Joel L Weissfeld; Lance A Yokochi; Barbara O'Brien; Jonathan D Clapp; Joshua M Rathmell; Thomas L Riley; Richard B Hayes; Barnett S Kramer; Grant Izmirlian; Anthony B Miller; Paul F Pinsky; Philip C Prorok; John K Gohagan; Christine D Berg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-03-18       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  [Status of care for prostate cancer in 2008].

Authors:  B Arndt; M Kwiatkowski; F Recker
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 10.  Risk stratification in prostate cancer screening.

Authors:  Monique J Roobol; Sigrid V Carlsson
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 14.432

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.