Background: The effect of screening with prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) testing and digital rectal examination on the rate of death from prostate cancer is unknown. This is the first report from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial on prostate-cancer mortality.

Methods: From 1993 through 2001, we randomly assigned 76,693 men at 10 U.S. study centers to receive either annual screening (38,343 subjects) or usual care as the control (38,350 subjects). Men in the screening group were offered annual PSA testing for 6 years and digital rectal examination for 4 years. The subjects and health care providers received the results and decided on the type of follow-up evaluation. Usual care sometimes included screening, as some organizations have recommended. The numbers of all cancers and deaths and causes of death were ascertained.

Results: In the screening group, rates of compliance were 85% for PSA testing and 86% for digital rectal examination. Rates of screening in the control group increased from 40% in the first year to 52% in the sixth year for PSA testing and ranged from 41 to 46% for digital rectal examination. After 7 years of follow-up, the incidence of prostate cancer per 10,000 person-years was 116 (2820 cancers) in the screening group and 95 (2322 cancers) in the control group (rate ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16 to 1.29). The incidence of death per 10,000 person-years was 2.0 (50 deaths) in the screening group and 1.7 (44 deaths) in the control group (rate ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.70). The data at 10 years were 67% complete and consistent with these overall findings.

Conclusions: After 7 to 10 years of follow-up, the rate of death from prostate cancer was very low and did not differ significantly between the two study groups. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00002540.)

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2944770PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0810696DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

psa testing
16
digital rectal
16
rectal examination
16
screening group
16
prostate cancer
12
control group
12
screening
10
screening trial
8
rate death
8
death prostate
8

Similar Publications

Prospective validation study of a combined urine and plasma test for predicting high-grade prostate cancer in biopsy naïve men.

Scand J Urol

January 2025

Department of Urology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark; Academy of Geriatric Cancer Research (AgeCare), Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark; Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.

Objective: Early and accurate diagnosis of prostate cancer (PC) is crucial for effective treatment. Diagnosing  clinically insignificant cancers can lead to overdiagnosis and overtreatment, highlighting the importance of accurately selecting patients for further evaluation based on improved risk prediction tools. Novel biomarkers offer promise for enhancing this diagnostic process.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Global Perspectives on Returning Genetic Research Results in Parkinson Disease.

Neurol Genet

December 2024

From the Division of Neurology (A.H.T., S.-Y.L.), Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Médicas da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (P.S.-A.), Clínica Santa María, Santiago, Chile; Departamento de Farmacologia (A.F.S.S.), Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; Serviço de Neurologia (A.F.S.S.), Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brazil; Institute of Neurogenetics (H.M., M.L.D., C.K.), University of Lübeck, Germany; Department of Biomedical Science (A.A.-A.), Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research (J.S., B.F.), New York; Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics (C.E.W.), Indiana University, Indianapolis; Department of Neuroscience and Brain Health (M.L.D.), Metropolitan Medical Center, Manila, Philippines; Centre for Preventive Neurology (S.D., M.T.P., A.J.N.), Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, United Kingdom; Unidad de Trastornos del Movimiento (M.T.P.), Servicio de Neurología y Neurofisiología Clínica, Instituto de Biomedicina de Sevilla, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío/CSIC/Universidad de Sevilla, Spain; Laboratory of Neurogenetics (M.B.M.), National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD; Department of Clinical and Movement Neurosciences (M.B.M., H.R.M.), UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, United Kingdom; Department of Neurology (R.N.A.), Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York; Movement Disorders Division (R.N.A.), Neurological Institute, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center and Tel Aviv School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Israel; Molecular Medicine Laboratory and Neurology Department (K.R.K.), Concord Clinical School, Concord Repatriation General Hospital, The University of Sydney; Translational Neurogenomics Group (K.R.K.), Genomic and Inherited Disease Program, Garvan Institute of Medical Research; and St Vincent's Healthcare Campus (K.R.K.), Faculty of Medicine, UNSW Sydney, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia.

Background And Objectives: In the era of precision medicine, genetic test results have become increasingly relevant in the care of patients with Parkinson disease (PD). While large research consortia are performing widespread research genetic testing to accelerate discoveries, debate continues about whether, and to what extent, the results should be returned to patients. Ethically, it is imperative to keep participants informed, especially when findings are potentially actionable.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objective: The objective of this study is to analyse the perspectives of screening candidates and healthcare professionals on shared decision-making (SDM) in prostate cancer (PCa) screening using the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test.

Design: Descriptive qualitative study (May-December 2022): six face-to-face focus groups and four semistructured interviews were conducted, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed using ATLAS.ti software.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: The Prostatype score (P-score) is a prognostic biomarker that integrates a three-gene (IGFBP3, F3, and VGLL3) signature derived from prostate biopsy samples, with key clinical parameters, including prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, Gleason grade, and tumor stage at diagnosis. The test has demonstrated superior predictive accuracy for prostate cancer outcomes compared with traditional risk categorization systems such as D'Amico. Notably, it reclassifies a higher proportion of patients into the low-risk category, making them eligible for active surveillance.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose To validate a deep learning (DL) model for predicting the risk of prostate cancer (PCa) progression based on MRI and clinical parameters and compare it with established models. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included 1607 MRI scans of 1143 male patients (median age, 64 years; IQR, 59-68 years) undergoing MRI for suspicion of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) (International Society of Urological Pathology grade > 1) between January 2012 and May 2022 who were negative for csPCa at baseline MRI. A DL model was developed using baseline MRI and clinical parameters (age, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level, PSA density, and prostate volume) to predict the time to PCa progression (defined as csPCa diagnosis at follow-up).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!