Literature DB >> 31820217

Changes in Prostate Cancer Presentation Following the 2012 USPSTF Screening Statement: Observational Study in a Multispecialty Group Practice.

Joseph Presti1,2, Stacey Alexeeff3, Brandon Horton3, Stephanie Prausnitz3, Andrew L Avins3,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In 2012, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended against PSA-based screening for prostate cancer in men of all ages. Following this change, screening declined yet the complete impact on clinical presentation is not well defined in the screen-eligible population.
OBJECTIVE: To determine if the rates of PSA screening, prostate biopsy, incident prostate cancer detection, and stage IV at presentation in screen-eligible men in Kaiser Permanente Northern California changed following the 2012 USPSTF Prostate Cancer Screening recommendations.
DESIGN: Retrospective study spanning the years 2010 to 2015, in screen-eligible Kaiser Permanente Northern California members (African American men ages 45-69 and all other men ages 50-69) with no prior history of prostate cancer. Participants All screen-eligible, male members during 2010 (n = 403,931) to 2015 (n = 483,286) without a history of prostate cancer within all Kaiser Permanente Northern California facilities. MAIN MEASURES: Annual rates of PSA testing, prostate biopsy, incident prostate cancer detection, and stage IV cancer at presentation were compared between the pre-guideline period, 2010 and 2011, and the post-guideline period, 2014 and 2015, in men under the age of 70. KEY
RESULTS: Following the 2012 USPSTF guideline change, screening rates declined 23.4% (95% CI 23.0-23.8%), biopsy rates declined 64.3% (95% CI 62.9-65.6%), and incident prostate cancer detection rates declined 53.5% (95% CI 50.1-56.7%) resulting in 1871 fewer incident cancers detected, and metastatic cancer rates increased 36.9% (95% CI 9.5-71.0%) resulting in 75 more stage IV cancers detected.
CONCLUSION: Less screening resulted in a large decrease in cancer detection, some of which may be beneficial as many cancers may be indolent, yet this decrease occurred at the expense of an increase in metastatic cancer rates. For every 25 fewer cancers detected, one metastatic cancer was diagnosed. This information may be valuable in the shared decision-making process around prostate cancer screening.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cancer screening; prostate cancer; shared decision-making

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31820217      PMCID: PMC7210336          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-019-05561-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  26 in total

Review 1.  Ecological bias, confounding, and effect modification.

Authors:  S Greenland; H Morgenstern
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 7.196

2.  Increase in Prostate Cancer Distant Metastases at Diagnosis in the United States.

Authors:  Jim C Hu; Paul Nguyen; Jialin Mao; Joshua Halpern; Jonathan Shoag; Jason D Wright; Art Sedrakyan
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 31.777

3.  Impact of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations against prostate specific antigen screening on prostate biopsy and cancer detection rates.

Authors:  Bimal Bhindi; Muhammad Mamdani; Girish S Kulkarni; Antonio Finelli; Robert J Hamilton; John Trachtenberg; Alexandre R Zlotta; Andrew Evans; Theodorus H van der Kwast; Ants Toi; Neil E Fleshner
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Prostate Cancer Incidence and PSA Testing Patterns in Relation to USPSTF Screening Recommendations.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Stacey A Fedewa; Jiemin Ma; Rebecca Siegel; Chun Chieh Lin; Otis Brawley; Elizabeth M Ward
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Prostate Needle Biopsy Outcomes in the Era of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation against Prostate Specific Antigen Based Screening.

Authors:  John S Banerji; Erika M Wolff; John D Massman; Katherine Odem-Davis; Christopher R Porter; John M Corman
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2015-08-06       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Chemohormonal Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Christopher J Sweeney; Yu-Hui Chen; Michael Carducci; Glenn Liu; David F Jarrard; Mario Eisenberger; Yu-Ning Wong; Noah Hahn; Manish Kohli; Matthew M Cooney; Robert Dreicer; Nicholas J Vogelzang; Joel Picus; Daniel Shevrin; Maha Hussain; Jorge A Garcia; Robert S DiPaola
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Impact of the US Preventive Services Task Force Grade D Recommendation: Assessment of Evaluations for Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen and Prostate Biopsies in a Large Urology Group Practice Following Statement Revision.

Authors:  Kathleen F McGinley; Gregory C McMahon; Gordon A Brown
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2015

8.  Risk-adjusting hospital mortality using a comprehensive electronic record in an integrated health care delivery system.

Authors:  Gabriel J Escobar; Marla N Gardner; John D Greene; David Draper; Patricia Kipnis
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  Interrupted time series regression for the evaluation of public health interventions: a tutorial.

Authors:  James Lopez Bernal; Steven Cummins; Antonio Gasparrini
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 7.196

10.  Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, part II: Recent changes in prostate cancer trends and disease characteristics.

Authors:  Serban Negoita; Eric J Feuer; Angela Mariotto; Kathleen A Cronin; Valentina I Petkov; Sarah K Hussey; Vicki Benard; S Jane Henley; Robert N Anderson; Stacey Fedewa; Recinda L Sherman; Betsy A Kohler; Barbara J Dearmon; Andrew J Lake; Jiemin Ma; Lisa C Richardson; Ahmedin Jemal; Lynne Penberthy
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2018-05-22       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  5 in total

1.  Changes in Prostate Cancer Presentation Following the 2012 USPSTF Screening Statement: Observational Study in a Multispecialty Group Practice.

Authors:  Michael J Barry
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Prostate Cancer: Community Education and Disparities in Diagnosis and Treatment.

Authors:  Bradley Carthon; Hannah C Sibold; Shannon Blee; Rebecca D Pentz
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2021-03-22

3.  PSA Screening: a Kind of Russian Roulette?

Authors:  Takeshi Takahashi
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 6.473

4.  Evolving Natural History of Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Nellie N Nafissi; Heidi E Kosiorek; Richard J Butterfield; Cassandra Moore; Thai Ho; Parminder Singh; Alan H Bryce
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2020-11-14

Review 5.  Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis: The Obstacles We Face in Determining a Non-Invasive Test and Current Advances in Biomarker Detection.

Authors:  Faddy Kamel; Khadiga Eltarhoni; Pasha Nisar; Mikhail Soloviev
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-08       Impact factor: 6.575

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.