BACKGROUND: The European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) investigates the feasibility of population-based screening. This report compares the preliminary outcome of cancers detected in the screen and the control arm of its Rotterdam section, by means of biochemical progression rates. METHODS: In the screen arm of this study (21,210 men), screening was applied according to well-established protocols, and a 4-year screen interval was chosen. Widely accepted biochemical progression-criteria were used to evaluate the diagnosed cancers over time. RESULTS: Although more cancers were detected in the screen than in the control arm (1,339 vs. 298, P < 0.001), their clinico-pathological features were more favorable. Furthermore, screened men had higher 5-year survival rates for biochemical progression after surgery (84.4% vs. 58.9% in controls), radiotherapy (71.0% vs. 58.0%), and endocrine therapy (40.5% vs. 16.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The higher biochemical progression-free survival can at least in part be explained by lead and length-time. How screening will effect the mortality remains unclear. Copyright 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) investigates the feasibility of population-based screening. This report compares the preliminary outcome of cancers detected in the screen and the control arm of its Rotterdam section, by means of biochemical progression rates. METHODS: In the screen arm of this study (21,210 men), screening was applied according to well-established protocols, and a 4-year screen interval was chosen. Widely accepted biochemical progression-criteria were used to evaluate the diagnosed cancers over time. RESULTS: Although more cancers were detected in the screen than in the control arm (1,339 vs. 298, P < 0.001), their clinico-pathological features were more favorable. Furthermore, screened men had higher 5-year survival rates for biochemical progression after surgery (84.4% vs. 58.9% in controls), radiotherapy (71.0% vs. 58.0%), and endocrine therapy (40.5% vs. 16.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The higher biochemical progression-free survival can at least in part be explained by lead and length-time. How screening will effect the mortality remains unclear. Copyright 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.