Literature DB >> 21392207

Screening for prostate cancer: an updated Cochrane systematic review.

Dragan Ilic1, Denise O'Connor, Sally Green, Timothy J Wilt.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: •To determine whether screening for prostate cancer reduces prostate cancer-specific mortality, impact on all-cause mortality and patient health-related quality of life.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: •An update to our 2006 Cochrane systematic review was performed by re-running an updated search of several databases, including MEDLINE and the Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials. • Articles were included if they were a randomized controlled trial (RCT) examining screening vs no screening for prostate cancer. Data was collected and analysed according to the methods outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.
RESULTS: •Five RCTs with a total of 341,351 participants were included in this updated Cochrane systematic review. All involved PSA testing, although the interval and threshold for further evaluation varied across trials. The age of participants was 50-74 years, with durations of patient follow-up of 7-15 years. •The methodological quality of three of the studies was assessed as posing a high risk of bias. •Meta-analysis of the five included studies indicated no statistically significant difference in prostate cancer-specific mortality between men randomized to screening and control [relative risk (RR) 0.95, 95% CI 0.85-1.07]. Sub-group analyses indicated that prostate cancer-specific mortality was not affected by age at which participants were screened. A pre-planned analysis of a 'core' age group of men aged 55-69 years from the largest RCT (European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer) reported a significant 20% relative reduction in prostate cancer-specific mortality; (95% CI 0.65-0.98; absolute risk 0.71 per 1000 men). The number of men diagnosed with prostate cancer was significantly greater in men randomized to screening, compared with those randomized to control (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.06-1.72). •Harms of screening included high rates of false-positive results for the PSA test, over-diagnosis and adverse events associated with transrectal ultrasonography guided biopsies such as infection, bleeding and pain.
CONCLUSIONS:Prostate cancer screening did not significantly decrease all-cause or prostate cancer-specific mortality in a combined meta-analysis of five RCTs. •Any benefits from prostate cancer screening may take > 10 years to accrue; therefore, men who have a life expectancy of < 10-15 years should be informed that screening for prostate cancer is not beneficial and has harms.
© 2011 THE AUTHOR. BJU INTERNATIONAL © 2011 BJU INTERNATIONAL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21392207     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.10032.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  48 in total

1.  Furthering the prostate cancer screening debate (prostate cancer specific mortality and associated risks).

Authors:  G Michael Allan; Michael P Chetner; Bryan J Donnelly; Neil A Hagen; David Ross; J Dean Ruether; Peter Venner
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  [U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation or "throwing out the baby with the bath water"].

Authors:  F Recker
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  [Recommendations against prostate cancer screening with PSA].

Authors:  Mercè Marzo-Castillejo; María Ángeles Nuin-Villanueva; Carmen Vela-Vallespín
Journal:  Aten Primaria       Date:  2012-04-18       Impact factor: 1.137

4.  Prostate cancer screening: facts, statistics, and interpretation in response to the US Preventive Services Task Force Review.

Authors:  Sigrid Carlsson; Andrew J Vickers; Monique Roobol; James Eastham; Peter Scardino; Hans Lilja; Jonas Hugosson
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-06-18       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  A new approach to patients with lower urinary tract symptoms.

Authors:  Marco H Blanker; Roelf J C Norg; Wouter K van der Heide
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 6.  Prostate Cancer Screening.

Authors:  William J Catalona
Journal:  Med Clin North Am       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 5.456

7.  Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA Guideline.

Authors:  H Ballentine Carter; Peter C Albertsen; Michael J Barry; Ruth Etzioni; Stephen J Freedland; Kirsten Lynn Greene; Lars Holmberg; Philip Kantoff; Badrinath R Konety; Mohammad Hassan Murad; David F Penson; Anthony L Zietman
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-05-06       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Establishing the infrastructure to conduct comparative effectiveness research toward the elimination of disparities: a community-based participatory research framework.

Authors:  Danyell S Wilson; Virna Dapic; Dawood H Sultan; Euna M August; B Lee Green; Richard Roetzheim; Brian Rivers
Journal:  Health Promot Pract       Date:  2013-02-21

9.  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

10.  Applications of transrectal ultrasound in prostate cancer.

Authors:  C J Harvey; J Pilcher; J Richenberg; U Patel; F Frauscher
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-07-27       Impact factor: 3.039

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.