The GÖTEBORG prostate cancer screening 2 trial: a prospective, randomised, population-based prostate cancer screening trial with prostate-specific antigen testing followed by magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate

References

• Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Garmo H, et al. Radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(10):932–942.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kupelian PA, Potters L, Khuntia D, et al. Radical prostatectomy, external beam radiotherapy <72 Gy, external beam radiotherapy > or =72 Gy, permanent seed implantation, or combined seeds/external beam radiotherapy for stage T1-T2 prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;58(1):25–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stamey TA, Yang N, Hay AR, et al. Prostate-specific antigen as a serum marker for adenocarcinoma of the prostate. N Engl J Med. 1987;317(15):909–916.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Catalona WJ, Smith DS, Ratliff TL, et al. Measurement of prostate-specific antigen in serum as a screening test for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 1991;324(17):1156–1161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW, Eastham JA, et al. Prostate cancer-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy for patients treated in the prostate-specific antigen era. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(26):4300–4305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Draisma G, Boer R, Otto SJ, et al. Lead times and overdetection due to prostate-specific antigen screening: estimates from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95(12):868–878.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heijnsdijk EA, der Kinderen A, Wever EM, et al. Overdetection, overtreatment and costs in prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer. Br J Cancer. 2009;101(11):1833–1838.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loeb S, Bjurlin MA, Nicholson J, et al. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2014;65(6):1046–1055.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU, et al. Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy. Eur Urol. 2013;64:876–892.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stattin P, Vickers AJ, Sjoberg DD, et al. Improving the specificity of screening for lethal prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen and a panel of kallikrein markers: a nested case-control study. Eur Urol. 2015;68(2):207–213.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soos G, Tsakiris I, Szanto J, et al. The prevalence of prostate carcinoma and its precursor in Hungary: an autopsy study. Eur Urol. 2005;48(5):739–744.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zlotta AR, Egawa S, Pushkar D, et al. Prevalence of prostate cancer on autopsy: cross-sectional study on unscreened Caucasian and Asian men. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105(14):1050–1058.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet. 2014;384:2027–2035.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hugosson J, Godtman RA, Carlsson SV, et al. Eighteen-year follow-up of the Göteborg Randomized Population-based Prostate Cancer Screening Trial: effect of sociodemographic variables on participation, prostate cancer incidence and mortality . Scand J Urol. 2018;52(1):27–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsodikov A, Gulati R, Heijnsdijk EAM, et al. Reconciling the effects of screening on prostate cancer mortality in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. Ann Intern Med. 2017;167(7):449–455.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mottet N, Briers E, Cornford P, et al. EAU - EANM - ESTRO - ESUR - SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer: EAU guidelines office, Arnhem, The Netherlands: 2019. [28 June 2019]. Available from: https://uroweb.org/guideline/prostate-cancer/
   Google Scholar
• Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017;389(10071):815–822.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rouviere O, Puech P, Renard-Penna R, et al. Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(1):100–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, et al. Prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.1: 2019 update of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2. Eur Urol. 2019;76(3):340–351.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoots IG, Padhani AR, Rouviere O, et al. Analysis of magnetic resonance imaging-directed biopsy strategies for changing the paradigm of prostate cancer diagnosis. Eur Urol Oncol. 2020;3(1):32–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sathianathen NJ, Omer A, Harriss E, et al. Negative predictive value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in the prostate imaging reporting and data system era: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2020;78(3):402–414.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drost FH, Osses D, Nieboer D, et al. Prostate magnetic resonance imaging, with or without magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer: a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2020;77(1):78–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, et al. MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(19):1767–1777.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grenabo Bergdahl A, Wilderang U, Aus G, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer screening: a pilot study within the Goteborg randomised screening trial. Eur Urol. 2016;70(4):566–573.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, et al. The 2014 international society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016;40(2):244–252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scb SS. Registret över totalbefolkningen (RTB), total population register 2020. [cited 2020 12 Oct]. Available from: https://www.scb.se/vara-tjanster/bestalla-mikrodata/vilka-mikrodata-finns/individregister/registret-over-totalbefolkningen-rtb/
   Google Scholar
• Samverkan VfpRci. Nationellt vårdprogram prostatacancer. 2020, March 3 [2020-06-08]. Available from: https://kunskapsbanken.cancercentrum.se/diagnoser/prostatacancer/vardprogram/
   Google Scholar
• Van der Kwast TH, Roobol MJ. Defining the threshold for significant versus insignificant prostate cancer. Nat Rev Urol. 2013;10(8):473–482.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zelen M. A new design for randomized clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 1979;300(22):1242–1245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roobol MJ, Kranse R, Bangma CH, et al. Screening for prostate cancer: results of the rotterdam section of the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2013;64(4):530–539.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regional cancercentrum väst. Förstudie: organiserad prostatacancertestning i VGR 2019 [December 23, 2020]. Available from: https://cancercentrum.se/globalassets/vara-uppdrag/prevention-tidig-upptackt/prostatacancertestning/vgr-forstudie-organiserad-prostatacancertestning.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Arnsrud Godtman R, Holmberg E, Lilja H, et al. Opportunistic testing versus organized prostate-specific antigen screening: outcome after 18 years in the Göteborg randomized population-based prostate cancer screening trial . Eur Urol. 2015;68(3):354–360.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar