PURPOSE: An American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) provisional clinical opinion (PCO) offers timely clinical direction to the ASCO membership after publication or presentation of potentially practice-changing data from major studies. This PCO addresses the role of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in the screening of men for prostate cancer. CLINICAL CONTEXT: Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among men in the United States. The rationale for screening men for prostate cancer is the potential to reduce the risk of death through early detection. RECENT DATA: Evidence from a 2011 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality systematic review primarily informs this PCO on the benefits and harms of PSA-based screening. An update search was conducted to March 16, 2012, for additional evidence related to the topic. RESULTS: In one randomized trial, PSA testing in men who would not otherwise have been screened resulted in reduced death rates from prostate cancer, but it is uncertain whether the size of the effect was worth the harms associated with screening and subsequent unnecessary treatment. Although there are limitations to the existing data, there is evidence to suggest that men with longer life expectancy may benefit from PSA testing. Adverse events associated with prostate biopsy are low for the majority of men; however, several population-based studies have shown increasing rates of infectious complications after prostate biopsy, which is a concern.
PURPOSE: An American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) provisional clinical opinion (PCO) offers timely clinical direction to the ASCO membership after publication or presentation of potentially practice-changing data from major studies. This PCO addresses the role of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in the screening of men for prostate cancer. CLINICAL CONTEXT: Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among men in the United States. The rationale for screening men for prostate cancer is the potential to reduce the risk of death through early detection. RECENT DATA: Evidence from a 2011 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality systematic review primarily informs this PCO on the benefits and harms of PSA-based screening. An update search was conducted to March 16, 2012, for additional evidence related to the topic. RESULTS: In one randomized trial, PSA testing in men who would not otherwise have been screened resulted in reduced death rates from prostate cancer, but it is uncertain whether the size of the effect was worth the harms associated with screening and subsequent unnecessary treatment. Although there are limitations to the existing data, there is evidence to suggest that men with longer life expectancy may benefit from PSA testing. Adverse events associated with prostate biopsy are low for the majority of men; however, several population-based studies have shown increasing rates of infectious complications after prostate biopsy, which is a concern.
Authors: Ian M Thompson; Donna Pauler Ankerst; Chen Chi; Phyllis J Goodman; Catherine M Tangen; M Scott Lucia; Ziding Feng; Howard L Parnes; Charles A Coltman Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2006-04-19 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: F Labrie; B Candas; A Dupont; L Cusan; J L Gomez; R E Suburu; P Diamond; J Lévesque; A Belanger Journal: Prostate Date: 1999-02-01 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Robert J Volk; Sarah T Hawley; Suzanne Kneuper; E Wayne Holden; Leonardo A Stroud; Crystale Purvis Cooper; Judy M Berkowitz; Lawrence E Scholl; Smita S Saraykar; Valory N Pavlik Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Anna Bill-Axelson; Lars Holmberg; Frej Filén; Mirja Ruutu; Hans Garmo; Christer Busch; Stig Nordling; Michael Häggman; Swen-Olof Andersson; Stefan Bratell; Anders Spångberg; Juni Palmgren; Hans-Olov Adami; Jan-Erik Johansson Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2008-08-11 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Xiaomei Ma; Rong Wang; Jessica B Long; Joseph S Ross; Pamela R Soulos; James B Yu; Danil V Makarov; Heather T Gold; Cary P Gross Journal: Cancer Date: 2013-10-04 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Robert K Nam; Thomas K Oliver; Andrew J Vickers; Ian Thompson; Philip W Kantoff; Howard L Parnes; Andrew Loblaw; Bruce J Roth; Jim Williams; Sarah Temin; Ethan Basch Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Stephen E Borst; Joshua F Yarrow; Christine F Conover; Unyime Nseyo; John R Meuleman; Judyta A Lipinska; Randy W Braith; Darren T Beck; Jeffrey S Martin; Matthew Morrow; Shirley Roessner; Luke A Beggs; Sean C McCoy; Darryl F Cannady; Jonathan J Shuster Journal: Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab Date: 2013-12-10 Impact factor: 4.310
Authors: Stephen J Lepore; Rasmi G Nair; Stacy N Davis; Randi L Wolf; Charles E Basch; Nigel Thomas; Celia Shmukler; Ralph Ullman Journal: J Immigr Minor Health Date: 2017-12