Screening for prostate cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 341, Issue 7773, 2010, Pages 593-

  Djulbegovic, Mia ^a   Beyth, Rebecca J ^a   Neuberger, Molly M ^a   Stoffs, Taryn L ^a   Vieweg, Johannes ^a   Djulbegovic, Benjamin ^b   Dahm, Philipp ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

AGE; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CAUSE OF DEATH; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; MALE; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 77956810216     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c4543     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Parkin D, Bray F, Devesa S. Cancer burden in the year 2000. The global picture. Eur J Cancer 2001;37:S4-66.
2. Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E. Cancer statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J Clin 2010:10.3322/caac.20073.
3. Lin K, Lipsitz R, Miller T, Janakiraman S. Benefits and harms of prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer: an evidence update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann InternMed 2008;149:192-9.
4. Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Ciatto S, Nelen V, et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl JMed 2009;360:1320-8.
5. Boyle P, Brawley OW. Prostate cancer: current evidence weighs against population screening. CA Cancer J Clin 2009;59:220-4.
6. Esserman L, Shieh Y, Thompson I. Rethinking screening for breast cancer and prostate cancer. JAMA 2009;302:1685-92.
7. Barry MJ. Screening for prostate cancer - the controversy that refuses to die. N Engl JMed 2009;360:1351-4.
8. Wolf AMD, Wender RC, Etzioni RB, Thompson IM, D'Amico AV, Volk RJ, et al. American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of prostate cancer: update 2010. CA Cancer J Clin 2010;60:70-98.
9. Brawley OW, Gansler T. Introducing the 2010 American Cancer Society prostate cancer screening guideline. CA Cancer J Clin 2010;60:68-9.
10. American Urological Association. AUA responds to American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of prostate cancer 2010. American Urological Association. March 3, 2010. www.auanet.org/content/press/press-releases/article. cfm?articleNo=178.
11. Sox HC, Greenfield S. Comparative effectiveness research: a report from the Institute of Medicine. Ann InternMed 2009;151:203-5.
12. Ilic D, O'Connor D, Green S, Wilt T. Screening for prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;3:CD004720.
13. Jegu J, Tretarre B, Grosclaude P, Rebillard X, Bataille V, Malavaud B, et al. Results and participation factors to the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer (ERSPC) with prostate specific antigen: French departments of Tarn Herault. Prog Urol 2009;19:487-98.
14. Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL, 3rd, Buys SS, Chia D, Church TR, et al. Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial.N Engl J Med 2009;360:1310-9.
15. Hugosson J, Carlsson S, Aus G, Bergdahl S, Khatami A, Lodding P, et al. Mortality results from the Göteborg randomised population-based prostate-cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:725-32.
16. Haynes RB, McKibbon KA, Wilczynski NL, Walter SD, Werre SR. Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ 2005;330:1179.
17. American Joint Committee on Cancer. Cancer stagingmanual. 7th ed. Springer, 2010.
18. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Cochrane Collaboration and John Wiley, 2008.
19. GuyattGH,OxmanAD, KunzR,VistGE, Falck-Ytter Y, SchunemannHJ, et al. What is "quality of evidence" and why is it important to clinicians? BMJ 2008;336:995-8.
20. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test.BMJ 1997;315:629-34.
21. Review manager (Revman) [program]. Nordic Cochrane Center, Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
22. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000097.
23. Hoffman R. Randomized trial results did not resolve controversies surrounding prostate cancer screening. Curr Opin Urol 2010;20:189-93.
24. Brawley OW, Ankerst DP, Thompson IM. Screening for prostate cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 2009;59:264-73.
25. Prorok PC, Andriole GL, Bresalier RS, Buys SS, Chia D, Crawford ED, et al. Design of the prostate, lung, colorectal and ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial. Control Clin Trials 2000;21(6 suppl):273-309S.
26. Sandblom G, Varenhorst E, Löfman O, Rosell J, Carlsson P. Clinical consequences of screening for prostate cancer: 15 years follow-up of a randomised controlled trial in Sweden. Eur Urol 2004;46:717-24. (Pubitemid 39488400)
27. Varenhorst E, Carlsson P, Capik E, Lofman O, Pudersen K. Repeated screening for carcinoma of the prostate by digital rectal examination in a randomly selected population. Acta Oncol 1992;31:815-21. (Pubitemid 23089752)
28. Labrie F, CandasB, Cusan L, Gomez JL, Belanger A, BrousseauG, et al. Screening decreases prostate cancer mortality: 11-year followup of the 1988 Quebec prospective randomized controlled trial. Prostate 2004;59:311-8.
29. Labrie F, Candas B, Dupont A, Cusan L, Gomez JL, Suburu RE, et al. Screening decreases prostate cancer death: first analysis of the 1988 Quebec prospective randomized controlled trial. Prostate 1999;38:83-91.
30. Labrie F, Cusan L, Gomez J, Levesque J, Candas B. Screening and treatment of localized prostate cancer decreases mortality: first analysis of the first prospective and randomized study on prostate cancer screening. Aging Male 1999;2:33-43. (Pubitemid 29305451)
31. Makinen T, Auvinen A, Hakama M, Stenman UH, Tammela TL. Acceptability and complications of prostate biopsy in population-based PSA screening versus routine clinical practice: a prospective controlled study. Urology 2002;60:846-50. (Pubitemid 35300352)
32. Raaijmakers R, KirkelsWK, RoobolMJ, WildhagenMF, Schroder FH. Complication rates and risk factors of 5802 transrectal ultrasound-guided sextant biopsies of the prostate within a population-based screening program. Urology 2002;60:826-30. (Pubitemid 35300348)
33. Carlsson SC, Holmberg E, Auvinen AP, Moss SM, Roobol MJ, Schroder FH, et al. No excess mortality after prostate biopsy: results from the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer (ERSPC). European Association of Urology Annual Meeting. Barcelona: European Association of Urology (EAU), April 19, 2010. www.uroweb.org/publications/abstracts-online/?id=108&no- cache=1&AID=26663.
34. Albertsen PC, Fryback DG, Storer BE, Kolon TF, Fine J. Long-term survival among men with conservatively treated localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1995;274:626-31.
35. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Fine J. 20-year outcomes following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 2005;293:2095-101. (Pubitemid 40617061)
36. Welch HG, Black WC. Overdiagnosis in cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010;102:1-9.
37. Etzioni R, PensonDF, Legler JM, di TommasoD, Boer R, Gann PH, et al. Overdiagnosis due to prostate-specific antigen screening: lessons from U.S. prostate cancer incidence trends. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:981-90. (Pubitemid 34814727)
38. Draisma G, Boer R, Otto SJ, van der Cruijsen IW,Damhuis RAM, Schroder FH, et al. Lead times and overdetection due to prostate-specific antigen screening: estimates fromthe European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:868-78. (Pubitemid 36833878)
39. Draisma G, Etzioni R, Tsodikov A, Mariotto A, Wever E, Gulati R, et al. Lead time and overdiagnosis in prostate-specific antigen screening: importance of methods and context. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009;101:374-83.
40. Sun X, Briel M, Walter SD, Guyatt GH. Is a subgroup effect believable? Updating criteria to evaluate the credibility of subgroup analyses. BMJ 2010;340:c117.
41. US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2008;149:185-91.
42. Schroder FH, Roobol MJ. ERSPC and PLCO prostate cancer screening studies: What are the differences? Eur Urol 2010;58:46-52.
43. Donovan J, Hamdy F, Neal D, et al. Prostate testing for cancer and treatment (ProtecT) feasibility study. Health Technol Assess 2003;7:1-81.
44. The ProtecT trial. Evaluating the effectiveness of treatment for clinically localised prostate cancer 2007. ISRCTN Register. 11 June 2010. www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN20141297.
45. Evaluating population-based screening for localised prostate cancer in the United Kingdom: an extension to the ProtecT treatment trial 2006. ISRCTN Register 17 March 2010. www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN92187251.
46. Wilt TJ, BrawerMK, BarryMJ, Jones TM, Kwon Y, Gingrich JR, et al. The prostate cancer intervention versus observation trial: VA/NCI/AHRQ Cooperative Studies Program #407 (PIVOT): design and baseline results of a randomized controlled trial comparing radical prostatectomy to watchful waiting for men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Contemp Clin Trials 2009;30:81-7.
47. Wilt TJ. SPCG-4: a needed START to PIVOTal data to promote and ProtecT evidence-based prostate cancer care. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:1123-5.
48. Kawachi MH, Bahnson RR, Barry M, Busby JE, Carroll PR, Carter HB, et al. National Comprehensive Cancer Network clinical practice guidelines in oncology: Prostate cancer early detection. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2010;8:240-62.