Literature DB >> 25359457

The Finnish prostate cancer screening trial: analyses on the screening failures.

Tuomas P Kilpeläinen1, Teuvo L J Tammela, Nea Malila, Matti Hakama, Henrikki Santti, Liisa Määttänen, Ulf-Håkan Stenman, Paula Kujala, Anssi Auvinen.   

Abstract

Prostate cancer (PC) screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has been shown to decrease PC mortality in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). However, in the Finnish trial, which is the largest component of the ERSPC, no statistically significant mortality reduction was observed. We investigated which had the largest impact on PC deaths in the screening arm: non-participation, interval cancers or PSA threshold. The screening (SA) and control (CA) arms comprised altogether 80,144 men. Men in the SA were screened at four-year intervals and referred to biopsy if the PSA concentration was ≥ 4.0 ng/ml, or 3.0-3.99 ng/ml with a free/total PSA ratio ≤ 16%. The median follow-up was 15.0 years. A counterfactual exclusion method was applied to estimate the effect of three subgroups in the SA: the non-participants, the screen-negative men with PSA ≥ 3.0 ng/ml and a subsequent PC diagnosis, and the men with interval PCs. The absolute risk of PC death was 0.76% in the SA and 0.85% in the CA; the observed hazard ratio (HR) was 0.89 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-1.04). After correcting for non-attendance, the HR was 0.78 (0.64-0.96); predicted effect for a hypothetical PSA threshold of 3.0 ng/ml the HR was 0.88 (0.74-1.04) and after eliminating the effect of interval cancers the HR was 0.88 (0.74-1.04). Non-participating men in the SA had a high risk of PC death and a large impact on PC mortality. A hypothetical lower PSA threshold and elimination of interval cancers would have had a less pronounced effect on the screening impact.
© 2014 UICC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  mass screening; mortality; prostate-specific antigen; prostatic neoplasms; randomized controlled trials

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25359457     DOI: 10.1002/ijc.29300

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


  5 in total

1.  A Four-kallikrein Panel and β-Microseminoprotein in Predicting High-grade Prostate Cancer on Biopsy: An Independent Replication from the Finnish Section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Melissa Assel; Liisa Sjöblom; Teemu J Murtola; Kirsi Talala; Paula Kujala; Ulf-Håkan Stenman; Kimmo Taari; Anssi Auvinen; Andrew Vickers; Tapio Visakorpi; Teuvo L Tammela; Hans Lilja
Journal:  Eur Urol Focus       Date:  2017-11-11

Review 2.  What's new in screening in 2015?

Authors:  Sigrid V Carlsson; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.309

3.  Characteristics of men responding to an invitation to undergo testing for prostate cancer as part of a randomised trial.

Authors:  Eleanor I Walsh; Emma L Turner; J Athene Lane; Jenny L Donovan; David E Neal; Freddie C Hamdy; Richard M Martin
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 2.279

4.  Prognostic Index for Predicting Prostate Cancer Survival in a Randomized Screening Trial: Development and Validation.

Authors:  Subas Neupane; Jaakko Nevalainen; Jani Raitanen; Kirsi Talala; Paula Kujala; Kimmo Taari; Teuvo L J Tammela; Ewout W Steyerberg; Anssi Auvinen
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-24       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 5.  Personalized strategies in population screening for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Sebastiaan Remmers; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 7.396

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.