Literature DB >> 19739124

The effect of study arm on prostate cancer treatment in the large screening trial ERSPC.

Tineke Wolters1, Monique J Roobol, Ewout W Steyerberg, Roderick C N van den Bergh, Chris H Bangma, Jonas Hugosson, Stefano Ciatto, Maciej Kwiatkowski, Arnauld Villers, Marcos Luján, Vera Nelen, Teuvo L J Tammela, Fritz H Schröder.   

Abstract

Prostate cancer (PC) mortality is the most valid end-point in screening trials, but could be influenced by the choice of initial treatment if treatment has an effect on mortality. In this study, PC treatment was compared between the screening and control arms in a screening trial. Data were collected from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). The characteristics and initial treatment of PC cases detected in the screening and the control arm were compared. Polytomous logistic regression analysis was used to assess the influence of study arm on treatment, adjusting for potential confounders and with statistical imputation of missing values. A total of 8,389 PC cases were detected, 5,422 in the screening arm and 3,145 in the control arm. Polytomous regression showed that trial arm was associated with treatment choice after correction for missing values, especially in men with high-risk PC. A control subject with high-risk PC was more likely than a screen subject to receive radiotherapy (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.01-2.05, p = 0.047), expectant management (OR: 2.92, 95% CI: 1.33-6.42, p = 0.007) or hormonal treatment (OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.07-2.94, p = 0.026) instead of radical prostatectomy. However, trial arm had only a minor role in treatment choice compared to other variables. In conclusion, a small effect of trial arm on treatment choice was seen, particularly in men with high-risk PC. Therefore, differences in treatment between arms are unlikely to play a major role in the interpretation of the results of the ERSPC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 19739124     DOI: 10.1002/ijc.24870

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  23 in total

1.  Prostate-specific antigen screening can be beneficial to younger and at-risk men.

Authors:  Monique J Roobol; Chris H Bangma; Stacy Loeb
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2012-05-07       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Correlation between stage shift and differences in mortality in the European Randomised study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).

Authors:  Leonard P Bokhorst; Marco Zappa; Sigrid V Carlsson; Maciej Kwiatkowski; Louis Denis; Alvaro Paez; Jonas Hugosson; Sue Moss; Anssi Auvinen; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2016-05-20       Impact factor: 5.588

3.  Data to support PSA screening for younger men lacking.

Authors:  Anthony B Miller; Bartholomew J Harvey
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 4.  Prevention and early detection of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jack Cuzick; Mangesh A Thorat; Gerald Andriole; Otis W Brawley; Powel H Brown; Zoran Culig; Rosalind A Eeles; Leslie G Ford; Freddie C Hamdy; Lars Holmberg; Dragan Ilic; Timothy J Key; Carlo La Vecchia; Hans Lilja; Michael Marberger; Frank L Meyskens; Lori M Minasian; Chris Parker; Howard L Parnes; Sven Perner; Harry Rittenhouse; Jack Schalken; Hans-Peter Schmid; Bernd J Schmitz-Dräger; Fritz H Schröder; Arnulf Stenzl; Bertrand Tombal; Timothy J Wilt; Alicja Wolk
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 41.316

Review 5.  Screening for prostate cancer: early detection or overdetection?

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Monique J Roobol; Hans Lilja
Journal:  Annu Rev Med       Date:  2011-11-03       Impact factor: 13.739

Review 6.  Prostate cancer screening: current status and future perspectives.

Authors:  Seth A Strope; Gerald L Andriole
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 14.432

7.  Prediction of biochemical failure using prostate-specific antigen half-life in patients with adverse pathologic features after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Kwang Suk Lee; Kyo Chul Koo; Byung Ha Chung
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  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

9.  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

Review 10.  Meeting the global demands of epidemiologic transition - the indispensable role of cancer prevention.

Authors:  Silvia Franceschi; Christopher P Wild
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2012-11-17       Impact factor: 6.603

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.