Literature DB >> 17501937

Estimating lead time and overdiagnosis associated with PSA screening from prostate cancer incidence trends.

Donatello Telesca1, Ruth Etzioni, Roman Gulati.   

Abstract

The introduction of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test has led to dramatic changes in the incidence of prostate cancer in the United States. In this article, we use information on the increase and subsequent decline in prostate cancer incidence following the adoption of PSA to estimate the lead time associated with PSA screening. The lead time is a key determinant of the likelihood of overdiagnosis, one of the main costs associated with the PSA test. Our approach conceptualizes observed incidence as the sum of the secular trend in incidence, which reflects incidence in the absence of PSA, and the excess incidence over and above the secular trend, which is a function of population screening patterns and the unknown lead time. We develop a likelihood model for the excess incidence given the secular trend and use it to estimate the mean lead time under specified distributional assumptions. We also develop a likelihood model for observed incidence and use it to simultaneously estimate the mean lead time together with a smooth secular trend. Variances and confidence intervals are estimated via a parametric bootstrap. Our results indicate an average lead time of approximately 4.59 years (95% confidence interval [3.24, 5.93]) for whites and 6.78 years [5.42, 8.20] for blacks with a corresponding secular trend estimate that is fairly flat after the introduction of PSA screening. These estimates correspond to overdiagnosis frequencies of approximately 22.7% and 34.4% for screen-detected whites and blacks, respectively. Our results provide the first glimpse of a plausible secular trend in prostate cancer incidence and suggest that, in the absence of PSA screening, disease incidence would not have continued its historic increase, rather it would have leveled off in accordance with changes in prostate patterns of care unrelated to PSA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17501937     DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2007.00825.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  44 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.  Influence of study features and methods on overdiagnosis estimates in breast and prostate cancer screening.

Authors:  Ruth Etzioni; Roman Gulati; Leslie Mallinger; Jeanne Mandelblatt
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2013-06-04       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 3.  Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Stacy Loeb; Marc A Bjurlin; Joseph Nicholson; Teuvo L Tammela; David F Penson; H Ballentine Carter; Peter Carroll; Ruth Etzioni
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-01-09       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Automated multiplexed ECL Immunoarrays for cancer biomarker proteins.

Authors:  Karteek Kadimisetty; Spundana Malla; Naimish P Sardesai; Amit A Joshi; Ronaldo C Faria; Norman H Lee; James F Rusling
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2015-04-09       Impact factor: 6.986

5.  Associations among statins, preventive care, and prostate cancer mortality.

Authors:  Abhishek Kumar; Paul Riviere; Elaine Luterstein; Vinit Nalawade; Lucas Vitzthum; Reith R Sarkar; Alex K Bryant; John P Einck; Arno J Mundt; James D Murphy; Brent S Rose
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2020-02-06       Impact factor: 5.554

6.  Cost-effectiveness of MR Imaging-guided Strategies for Detection of Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Men.

Authors:  Shivani Pahwa; Nicholas K Schiltz; Lee E Ponsky; Ziang Lu; Mark A Griswold; Vikas Gulani
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2017-05-17       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Response: Reading between the lines of cancer screening trials: using modeling to understand the evidence.

Authors:  Ruth Etzioni; Roman Gulati
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Lead time and overdiagnosis in prostate-specific antigen screening: importance of methods and context.

Authors:  Gerrit Draisma; Ruth Etzioni; Alex Tsodikov; Angela Mariotto; Elisabeth Wever; Roman Gulati; Eric Feuer; Harry de Koning
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2009-03-10       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Overdetection, overtreatment and costs in prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer.

Authors:  E A M Heijnsdijk; A der Kinderen; E M Wever; G Draisma; M J Roobol; H J de Koning
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Latent class cluster analysis to understand heterogeneity in prostate cancer treatment utilities.

Authors:  Salimah H Meghani; Christopher S Lee; Alexandra L Hanlon; Deborah W Bruner
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2009-11-27       Impact factor: 2.796

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.