| 1. |
- Pasanen, Niko, et al.
(författare)
-
Which men benefit from prostate cancer screening? Prostate cancer mortality by subgroup in the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer
- 2024
-
Ingår i: BJU INTERNATIONAL. - 1464-4096 .- 1464-410X. ; 134:2, s. 291-299
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- ObjectiveTo evaluate whether a subgroup of men can be identified that would benefit more from screening than others.Materials and MethodsThis retrospective cohort study was based on three European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) centres, Finland, the Netherlands and Sweden. We identified 126 827 men aged 55-69 years in the study who were followed for maximum of 16 years after randomisation. The primary outcome was prostate cancer (PCa) mortality. We analysed three age groups 55-59, 60-64 and 65-69 years and PCa cases within four European Association of Urology (EAU) risk groups: low, intermediate, high risk, and advanced disease.ResultsThe hazard ratio (HR) for PCa mortality in the screening arm relative to the control arm for men aged 55-59 years was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75-1.24) in Finland, 0.70 (95% CI 0.44-1.12) in the Netherlands and 0.42 (95% CI 0.24-0.73) in Sweden. The HR for men aged 60-64 years was 1.03 (95% CI 0.77-1.37) in Finland, 0.76 (95% CI 0.50-1.16) in the Netherlands and 0.97 (95% CI 0.64-1.48) in Sweden. The HR for men aged 65-69 years was 0.80 (95% CI 0.62-1.03) in Finland and 0.57 (95% CI 0.38-0.83) in the Netherlands, and this age group was absent in Sweden. In the EAU risk group analysis, PCa mortality rates were materially lower for men with advanced disease at diagnosis in all three countries: 0.67 (95% CI 0.56-0.82) in Finland, 0.28 (95% CI 0.18-0.44) in the Netherlands, and 0.48 (95% CI 0.30-0.78) in Sweden.ConclusionWe were unable to unequivocally identify the optimal age group for screening, as mortality reduction differed among centres and age groups. Instead, the screening effect appears to depend on screening duration, and the number and frequency of screening rounds. PCa mortality reduction by screening is largely attributable to stage shift.
|
|
| 2. |
- Saarimäki, Lasse, et al.
(författare)
-
Impact of Prostatic-specific Antigen Threshold and Screening Interval in Prostate Cancer Screening Outcomes: Comparing the Swedish and Finnish European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Centres.
- 2019
-
Ingår i: European urology focus. - : Elsevier BV. - 2405-4569. ; 5:2, s. 186-191
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer trial has shown a 21% reduction in prostate cancer (PC) mortality with prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening. Sweden used a 2-yr screening interval and showed a larger mortality reduction than Finland with a 4-yr interval and higher PSA cut-off.To evaluate the impact of screening interval and PSA cut-off on PC detection and mortality.We analysed the core age groups (55-69 yr at entry) of the Finnish (N=31 866) and Swedish (N=5901) screening arms at 13 yr and 16 yr of follow-up. Sweden used a screening interval of 2 yr and a PSA cut-off of 3.0ng/ml, while in Finland the screening interval was 4 yr and the PSA cut-off 4.0ng/ml (or PSA 3.0-3.9ng/ml with free PSA<16%).We compared PC detection rate and PC mortality between the Finnish and Swedish centres and estimated the impact of different screening protocols.If the Swedish screening protocol had been followed in Finland, 122 additional PC cases would have been diagnosed at screening, 84% of which would have been low-risk cancers, and four leading to PC death. In contrast, if a lower PSA threshold had been applied in Finland, at least 127 additional PC would have been found, with 19 PC deaths.The small number of deaths among cases that would have been potentially detectable in Finland with the Swedish protocol (or those that would have been missed in Sweden with the Finnish approach) is unlikely to explain the differences in mortality in this long of a follow-up.A prostate-specific antigen threshold of 3ng/ml versus 4ng/ml or a screening interval of 2 yr instead of 4 yr is unlikely to explain the larger mortality reduction achieved in Sweden compared with Finland.
|
|
| 3. |
- Stenman, Ulf-Håkan, et al.
(författare)
-
What explains the differences between centres in the European screening trial? A simulation study.
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Cancer epidemiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1877-783X .- 1877-7821. ; 46, s. 14-19
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The European Randomised study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) is a multicentre, randomised screening trial on men aged 55-69 years at baseline without known prostate cancer (PrCa) at randomisation to an intervention arm invited to screening or to a control arm. The ERSPC has shown a significant 21% reduction in PrCa mortality at 13 years of follow-up. The effect of screening appears to vary across centres, for which several explanations are possible. We set to assess if the apparent differences in PrCa mortality reduction between the centres can be explained by differences in screening protocols.We examined the centre differences by developing a simulation model and estimated how alternative screening protocols would have affected PrCa mortality.Our results showed outcomes similar to those observed, when the results by centres were reproduced by simulating the screening regimens with PSA threshold of 3 versus 4ng/ml, or screening interval of two versus four years. The findings suggest that the differences are only marginally attributable to the different screening protocols.The small screening impact in Finland was not explained by the differences in the screening protocols. A possible reason for it was the contamination of and the unexpectedly low PrCa mortality in the Finnish control arm.
|
|
