Literature DB >> 19297566

Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study.

Fritz H Schröder1, Jonas Hugosson, Monique J Roobol, Teuvo L J Tammela, Stefano Ciatto, Vera Nelen, Maciej Kwiatkowski, Marcos Lujan, Hans Lilja, Marco Zappa, Louis J Denis, Franz Recker, Antonio Berenguer, Liisa Määttänen, Chris H Bangma, Gunnar Aus, Arnauld Villers, Xavier Rebillard, Theodorus van der Kwast, Bert G Blijenberg, Sue M Moss, Harry J de Koning, Anssi Auvinen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer was initiated in the early 1990s to evaluate the effect of screening with prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) testing on death rates from prostate cancer.
METHODS: We identified 182,000 men between the ages of 50 and 74 years through registries in seven European countries for inclusion in our study. The men were randomly assigned to a group that was offered PSA screening at an average of once every 4 years or to a control group that did not receive such screening. The predefined core age group for this study included 162,243 men between the ages of 55 and 69 years. The primary outcome was the rate of death from prostate cancer. Mortality follow-up was identical for the two study groups and ended on December 31, 2006.
RESULTS: In the screening group, 82% of men accepted at least one offer of screening. During a median follow-up of 9 years, the cumulative incidence of prostate cancer was 8.2% in the screening group and 4.8% in the control group. The rate ratio for death from prostate cancer in the screening group, as compared with the control group, was 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.98; adjusted P=0.04). The absolute risk difference was 0.71 death per 1000 men. This means that 1410 men would need to be screened and 48 additional cases of prostate cancer would need to be treated to prevent one death from prostate cancer. The analysis of men who were actually screened during the first round (excluding subjects with noncompliance) provided a rate ratio for death from prostate cancer of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.56 to 0.90).
CONCLUSIONS: PSA-based screening reduced the rate of death from prostate cancer by 20% but was associated with a high risk of overdiagnosis. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN49127736.) 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19297566     DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0810084

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  1172 in total

1.  Prostate cancer screening: Attitudes and practices of family physicians in Ontario.

Authors:  Christopher B Allard; Shawn Dason; Janis Lusis; Anil Kapoor
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 2.  Management of low (favourable)-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  H Ballentine Carter
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 5.588

3.  HER2 overcomes PTEN (loss)-induced senescence to cause aggressive prostate cancer.

Authors:  Imran Ahmad; Rachana Patel; Lukram Babloo Singh; Colin Nixon; Morag Seywright; Robert J Barnetson; Valerie G Brunton; William J Muller; Joanne Edwards; Owen J Sansom; Hing Y Leung
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-09-19       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Optimization of PSA screening policies: a comparison of the patient and societal perspectives.

Authors:  Jingyu Zhang; Brian T Denton; Hari Balasubramanian; Nilay D Shah; Brant A Inman
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 5.  Magnetic resonance spectroscopy: a promising tool for the diagnostics of human prostate cancer?

Authors:  Johannes Kurth; Elita Defeo; Leo L Cheng
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2011 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.498

Review 6.  Robotic prostate biopsy and its relevance to focal therapy of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Henry Ho; John S P Yuen; Christopher W S Cheng
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 14.432

7.  The efficacy of prostate-specific antigen screening: Impact of key components in the ERSPC and PLCO trials.

Authors:  Harry J de Koning; Roman Gulati; Sue M Moss; Jonas Hugosson; Paul F Pinsky; Christine D Berg; Anssi Auvinen; Gerald L Andriole; Monique J Roobol; E David Crawford; Vera Nelen; Maciej Kwiatkowski; Marco Zappa; Marcos Luján; Arnauld Villers; Tiago M de Carvalho; Eric J Feuer; Alex Tsodikov; Angela B Mariotto; Eveline A M Heijnsdijk; Ruth Etzioni
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2017-12-06       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Biology and Clinical Implications of the 19q13 Aggressive Prostate Cancer Susceptibility Locus.

Authors:  Ping Gao; Ji-Han Xia; Csilla Sipeky; Xiao-Ming Dong; Qin Zhang; Yuehong Yang; Peng Zhang; Sara Pereira Cruz; Kai Zhang; Jing Zhu; Hang-Mao Lee; Sufyan Suleman; Nikolaos Giannareas; Song Liu; Teuvo L J Tammela; Anssi Auvinen; Xiaoyue Wang; Qilai Huang; Liguo Wang; Aki Manninen; Markku H Vaarala; Liang Wang; Johanna Schleutker; Gong-Hong Wei
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2018-07-19       Impact factor: 41.582

Review 9.  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

10.  Comparative effectiveness of alternative prostate-specific antigen--based prostate cancer screening strategies: model estimates of potential benefits and harms.

Authors:  Roman Gulati; John L Gore; Ruth Etzioni
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 25.391

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.