Screening for prostate cancer-The controversy continues, but can it be resolved?

Acta Oncologica

Volumn 50, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2011, Pages 4-11

  Bul, Meelan ^a   Schröder, Fritz H ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CAUSE OF DEATH; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MULTICENTER STUDY (TOPIC); OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; TREATMENT INDICATION;

EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; HUMANS; MALE; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 79957450104     PISSN: 0284186X     EISSN: 1651226X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/0284186X.2010.522197     Document Type: Review

References (26)

1. 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 J Med 2009;360: 1320-8.
2. 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.
3. Hugosson J, Carlsson S, Aus G, Bergdahl S, Khatami A, Lodding P, et al. Mortality results from the Goteborg randomised population-based prostate-cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncol 2010.
4. Schroder FH, Roobol MJ. ERSPC and PLCO prostate cancer screening studies: What are the differences? Eur Urol 2010;doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2010.03.033.
5. Holmberg L. Prostate cancer screening: The need for problem-solving that puts men's interests fi rst. Eur Urol 2009; 56:34-7.
6. Wolters T, Roobol MJ, Steyerberg EW, van den Bergh RC, Bangma CH, Hugosson J, et al. The effect of study arm on prostate cancer treatment in the large screening trial ERSPC. Int J Cancer 2010;126:2387-93.
7. Draisma G, Boer R, Otto SJ, van der Cruijsen IW, Damhuis RA, Schroder FH, et al. Lead times and overdetection due to prostate-specifi c antigen screening: Estimates from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:868-78. (Pubitemid 36833878)
8. Roobol MJ, Kerkhof M, Schroder FH, Cuzick J, Sasieni P, Hakama M, et al. Prostate cancer mortality reduction by prostate-specifi c antigen-based screening adjusted for nonattendance and contamination in the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). Eur Urol 2009;56:584-91.
9. Cuzick J, Edwards R, Segnan N. Adjusting for non-compliance and contamination in randomized clinical trials. Stat Med 1997;16:1017-29. (Pubitemid 27198989)
10. Kerkhof M, Roobol MJ, Cuzick J, Sasieni P, Roemeling S, Schroder FH, et al. Effect of the correction for non-compliance and contamination on the estimated reduction of metastatic prostate cancer within a randomized screening trial (ERSPC section rotterdam). Int J Cancer 2010; Epub 2010 Mar 1.
11. Ablin RJ. The great prostate mistake. New York Times. 2010 March 10.
12. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin 2009;59:225-49.
13. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin 2005;55:74-108. (Pubitemid 40372904)
14. Dubben HH. Trials of prostate-cancer screening are not worthwhile. Lancet Oncol 2009;10:294-8.
15. Boyle P, Brawley OW. Prostate cancer: Current evidence weighs against population screening. CA Cancer J Clin 2009;59:220-4.
16. Brawley OW, Ankerst DP, Thompson IM. Screening for prostate cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 2009;59:264-73.
17. De Koning HJ, Hakulinen T, Moss SM, Adolfsson J, Smith PH, Alexander FE, et al. Monitoring the ERSPC trial. BJU Int 2003;92(Suppl 2):112-4. (Pubitemid 38091153)
18. Barry MJ. Screening for prostate cancer-the controversy that refuses to die. N Engl J Med 2009;360:1351-4.
19. Stark JR, Mucci L, Rothman KJ, Adami HO. Screening for prostate cancer remains controversial. BMJ 2009;339: 784-6.
20. Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Chi C, Lucia MS, Goodman PJ, Crowley JJ, et al. Operating characteristics of prostatespecifi c antigen in men with an initial PSA level of 3.0 ng/ ml or lower. JAMA 2005;294:66-70. (Pubitemid 41002840)
21. Roobol MJ, Aus G, Auvinen A, Bangma CH, Berenguer A, Ciatto S, et al. How to screen for prostate cancer after 2008? PSA as a biopsy indicator, part II. Eur Urol Suppl 2009; 9:191.
22. Schroder FH, van den Bergh RC, Wolters T, van Leeuwen PJ, Bangma CH, van der Kwast TH, et al. Eleven-year outcome of patients with prostate cancers diagnosed during screening after initial negative sextant biopsies. Eur Urol 2010;57: 256-66.
23. Roobol MJ, Steyerberg EW, Kranse R, Wolters T, van den Bergh RC, Bangma CH, et al. A risk-based strategy improves prostate-specifi c antigen-driven detection of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2010;57:79-85.
24. Steyerberg EW, Roobol MJ, Kattan MW, van der Kwast TH, de Koning HJ, Schroder FH. Prediction of indolent prostate cancer: Validation and updating of a prognostic nomogram. J Urol 2007;177:107-12. (Pubitemid 44879468)
25. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Filen F, Ruutu M, Garmo H, Busch C, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in localized prostate cancer: The Scandinavian prostate cancer group-4 randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008; 100:1144-54.
26. Heidenreich A, Aus G, Bolla M, Joniau S, Matveev VB, Schmid HP, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2008;53:68-80. (Pubitemid 350166735)