Literature DB >> 19261258

Trials of prostate-cancer screening are not worthwhile.

Hans-Hermann Dubben1.   

Abstract

About 3% of men in developed countries die from prostate cancer. No conclusive evidence, however, either supports or refutes the benefit of prostate-cancer screening. More than 200 000 participants are needed for a screening study with prostate-cancer-specific death as the endpoint. A relative reduction in prostate-cancer mortality of 25% leads to a decrease in absolute risk of less than 1%-a difference of 75 individuals between the control and screening group. Participant non-compliance and small inaccuracies in attributing cause of death need to be compensated for in study size, requiring several million participants. Screening trials with insufficient sample sizes might show a lowering of cancer-specific mortality but not detect increases in all-cause mortality related to screening. Studies of a manageable size have too little discriminatory power and last a long time. Furthermore, results become available decades after trial initiation, by which time they are probably antiquated. Whether screening for prostate cancer is beneficial cannot be assessed in trials, a statement that might also be true for other diseases with low specific mortality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19261258     DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70066-X

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Oncol        ISSN: 1470-2045            Impact factor:   41.316


  5 in total

1.  [Therapy of local prostate carcinoma. Questions answered by outcome research].

Authors:  D Schnell; H Schön; L Weissbach
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  [Old wine in new bottles? The study of Hugosson et al on PSA-based screening].

Authors:  C Schaefer; L Weissbach; H H Dubben
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Timothy J Wilt; Michael K Brawer; Karen M Jones; Michael J Barry; William J Aronson; Steven Fox; Jeffrey R Gingrich; John T Wei; Patricia Gilhooly; B Mayer Grob; Imad Nsouli; Padmini Iyer; Ruben Cartagena; Glenn Snider; Claus Roehrborn; Roohollah Sharifi; William Blank; Parikshit Pandya; Gerald L Andriole; Daniel Culkin; Thomas Wheeler
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-07-19       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Personalised medicine, disease prevention, and the inverse care law: more harm than benefit?

Authors:  Jack E James
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2014-04-12       Impact factor: 8.082

5.  [Social gradient of PSA screening? 8 years follow up from the cancer registry of the tumor center in Regensburg].

Authors:  T Klotz; M J Mathers; M Gerken; M Klinkhammer-Schalke; F Hofstädter
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 0.639

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.