Literature DB >> 18678846

Benefits and harms of prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer: an evidence update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Kenneth Lin1, Robert Lipsitz, Therese Miller, Supriya Janakiraman.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is the most common nonskin cancer in men in the United States, and prostate cancer screening has increased in recent years. In 2002, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force concluded that evidence was insufficient to recommend for or against screening for prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing.
PURPOSE: To examine new evidence on benefits and harms of screening asymptomatic men for prostate cancer with PSA. DATA SOURCES: English-language articles identified in PubMed and the Cochrane Library (search dates, January 2002 to July 2007), reference lists of retrieved articles, and expert suggestions. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized, controlled trials and meta-analyses of PSA screening and cross-sectional and cohort studies of screening harms and of the natural history of screening-detected cancer were selected to answer the following questions: Does screening for prostate cancer with PSA, as a single-threshold test or as a function of multiple tests over time, decrease morbidity or mortality? What are the magnitude and nature of harms associated with prostate cancer screening, other than overtreatment? What is the natural history of PSA-detected, nonpalpable, localized prostate cancer? DATA EXTRACTION: Studies were reviewed, abstracted, and rated for quality by using predefined U.S. Preventive Services Task Force criteria. DATA SYNTHESIS: No good-quality randomized, controlled trials of screening for prostate cancer have been completed. In 1 cross-sectional and 2 prospective cohort studies of fair to good quality, false-positive PSA screening results caused psychological adverse effects for up to 1 year after the test. The natural history of PSA-detected prostate cancer is poorly understood. LIMITATIONS: Few eligible studies were identified. Long-term adverse effects of false-positive PSA screening test results are unknown.
CONCLUSION: Prostate-specific antigen screening is associated with psychological harms, and its potential benefits remain uncertain.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18678846     DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-149-3-200808050-00009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  85 in total

Review 1.  Cancer biomarkers.

Authors:  N Lynn Henry; Daniel F Hayes
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2012-02-06       Impact factor: 6.603

2.  Efficacy of prophylactic single-dose therapy using fluoroquinolone for prostate brachytherapy.

Authors:  Takeo Nomura; Kenichi Hirai; Mutsushi Yamasaki; Toru Inoue; Mika Takahashi; Takayuki Kawashima; Fuminori Sato; Hiromitsu Mimata
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 2.374

3.  Remaining Life Expectancy Measurement and PSA Screening of Older Men.

Authors:  Ashwin A Kotwal; Supriya G Mohile; William Dale
Journal:  J Geriatr Oncol       Date:  2012-07-01       Impact factor: 3.599

4.  Does variation in either age at start of therapy or duration of therapy make chemoprevention with finasteride cost-effective?

Authors:  S B Stewart; C D Scales; J W Moul; S D Reed
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 5.554

5.  Increasing low risk prostate cancer incidence in United States Air Force servicemen and selection of treatments.

Authors:  Deborah J del Junco; Erin E Fox; Sharon Cooper; Marc Goldhagen; Erik Koda; David Rogers; Edith Canby-Hagino; Jeri Kim; Curtis Pettaway; Douglas D Boyd
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 6.  Prostate biopsy for the interventional radiologist.

Authors:  Cheng William Hong; Hayet Amalou; Sheng Xu; Baris Turkbey; Pingkun Yan; Jochen Kruecker; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Radiol       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 3.464

7.  Measuring low-value care in Medicare.

Authors:  Aaron L Schwartz; Bruce E Landon; Adam G Elshaug; Michael E Chernew; J Michael McWilliams
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 21.873

8.  Affective, cognitive and behavioral outcomes associated with a false positive ovarian cancer screening test result.

Authors:  Amanda T Wiggins; Edward J Pavlik; Michael A Andrykowski
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2017-04-21

9.  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

10.  Five-year downstream outcomes following prostate-specific antigen screening in older men.

Authors:  Louise C Walter; Kathy Z Fung; Katharine A Kirby; Ying Shi; Roxanne Espaldon; Sarah O'Brien; Stephen J Freedland; Adam A Powell; Richard M Hoffman
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2013-05-27       Impact factor: 21.873

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.