Should prostate-specific antigen screening be offered to asymptomatic men?

References

• Ferlay J, Autier P, Boniol M, Heanue M, Colombet M, Boyle P. Estimates of the cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2006. Ann. Oncol.18(3), 581–592 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J. Clin.59(4), 225–249 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N. Engl. J. Med.360(13), 1320–1328 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferlay J BF, Pisani P, Parkin DM. GLOBOCAN 2002. Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide. IARC Cancer Base No. 5 Version 2.0. IARC Press, Lyon, France (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Global Cancer Facts and Figures 2007. American Cancer Society, GA, USA (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Karan D, Thrasher JB, Lubaroff D. Prostate cancer: genes, environment, immunity and the use of immunotherapy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis.11(3), 230–236 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Etzioni R, Penson DF, Legler JM et al. Overdiagnosis due to prostate-specific antigen screening: lessons from U.S. prostate cancer incidence trends. J. Natl Cancer Inst.94(13), 981–990 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collin SM, Martin RM, Metcalfe C et al. Prostate-cancer mortality in the USA and UK in 1975–2004: an ecological study. Lancet Oncol.9(5), 445–452 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grubb RL 3rd, Pinsky PF, Greenlee RT et al. Prostate cancer screening in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian cancer screening trial: update on findings from the initial four rounds of screening in a randomized trial. BJU Int.102(11), 1524–1530 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Postma R, Schroder FH, van Leenders GJ et al. Cancer detection and cancer characteristics in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) – Section Rotterdam. A comparison of two rounds of screening. Eur. Urol.52(1), 89–97 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyle P, Ferlay J. Cancer incidence and mortality in Europe, 2004. Ann. Oncol.16(3), 481–488 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heidenreich A, Bolla M, Joniau S et al.Guidelines on Prostate Cancer 2009. European Association of Urology, Arnhem, The Netherlands (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL 3rd et al. Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. N. Engl. J. Med.360(13), 1310–1319 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stamey TA, Yang N, Hay AR, McNeal JE, Freiha FS, Redwine E. Prostate-specific antigen as a serum marker for adenocarcinoma of the prostate. N. Engl. J. Med.317(15), 909–916 (1987).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melia J. Part 1: the burden of prostate cancer, its natural history, information on the outcome of screening and estimates of ad hoc screening with particular reference to England and Wales. BJU Int.95(Suppl. 3), 4–15 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Chi C et al. Operating characteristics of prostate-specific antigen in men with an initial PSA level of 3.0 ng/ml or lower. JAMA294(1), 66–70 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schroder FH, Carter HB, Wolters T et al. Early detection of prostate cancer in 2007. Part 1: PSA and PSA kinetics. Eur. Urol.53(3), 468–477 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schroder FH, Roobol MJ. Defining the optimal prostate-specific antigen threshold for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Curr. Opin. Urol.19(3), 227–231 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Thompson IM, Pauler DK, Goodman PJ et al. Prevalence of prostate cancer among men with a prostate-specific antigen level < or =4.0 ng per milliliter. N. Engl. J. Med.350(22), 2239–2246 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roddam AW, Duffy MJ, Hamdy FC et al. Use of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) isoforms for the detection of prostate cancer in men with a PSA level of 2–10 ng/ml: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. Urol.48(3), 386–399 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bozeman CB, Carver BS, Caldito G, Venable DD, Eastham JA. Prostate cancer in patients with an abnormal digital rectal examination and serum prostate-specific antigen less than 4.0 ng/ml. Urology66(4), 803–807 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Andriole GL, Levin DL, Crawford ED et al. Prostate Cancer Screening in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial: findings from the initial screening round of a randomized trial. J. Natl Cancer Inst.97(6), 433–438 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Okotie OT, Roehl KA, Han M, Loeb S, Gashti SN, Catalona WJ. Characteristics of prostate cancer detected by digital rectal examination only. Urology70(6), 1117–1120 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gosselaar C, Roobol MJ, Roemeling S, Schroder FH. The role of the digital rectal examination in subsequent screening visits in the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer (ERSPC), Rotterdam. Eur. Urol.54(3), 581–588 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schroder FH, van den Bergh RC, Wolters T et al. Eleven-year outcome of patients with prostate cancers diagnosed during screening after initial negative sextant biopsies. Eur. Urol.57(2), 256–266 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Ficarra V, Novella G, Novara G et al. The potential impact of prostate volume in the planning of optimal number of cores in the systematic transperineal prostate biopsy. Eur. Urol.48(6), 932–937 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Djavan B, Margreiter M. Biopsy standards for detection of prostate cancer. World J. Urol.25(1), 11–17 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vashi AR, Wojno KJ, Gillespie B, Oesterling JE. A model for the number of cores per prostate biopsy based on patient age and prostate gland volume. J. Urol.159(3), 920–924 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein JI, Herawi M. Prostate needle biopsies containing prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical foci suspicious for carcinoma: implications for patient care. J. Urol.175(3 Pt 1), 820–834 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roobol MJ, Schroder FH, Crawford ED et al. A framework for the identification of men at increased risk for prostate cancer. J. Urol.182(5), 2112–2120 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Bostwick DG, Burke HB, Djakiew D et al. Human prostate cancer risk factors. Cancer101(10 Suppl.), 2371–2490 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schroder FH, Roobol MJ, Andriole GL, Fleshner N. Defining increased future risk for prostate cancer: evidence from a population based screening cohort. J. Urol.181(1), 69–74 (2009).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Chi C et al. Assessing prostate cancer risk: results from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial. J. Natl Cancer Inst.98(8), 529–534 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schroder F, Kattan MW. The comparability of models for predicting the risk of a positive prostate biopsy with prostate-specific antigen alone: a systematic review. Eur. Urol.54(2), 274–290 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roobol MJ, Steyerberg EW, Kranse R et al. A risk-based strategy improves prostate-specific antigen-driven detection of prostate cancer. Eur. Urol.57(1), 79–85 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA271(5), 368–374 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conti SL, Dall’era M, Fradet V, Cowan JE, Simko J, Carroll PR. Pathological outcomes of candidates for active surveillance of prostate cancer. J. Urol.181(4), 1628–1633 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bangma CH, Roobol MJ, Steyerberg EW. Predictive models in diagnosing indolent cancer. Cancer115(13 Suppl.), 3100–3106 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Wheeler TM et al. Counseling men with prostate cancer: a nomogram for predicting the presence of small, moderately differentiated, confined tumors. J. Urol.170(5), 1792–1797 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.177(1), 107–112 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Kattan MW, van der Kwast TH, Steyerberg EW, Schroder FH. Nomogram use for the prediction of indolent prostate cancer: impact on screen-detected populations. Cancer110(10), 2218–2221 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chun FK, Karakiewicz PI, Huland H, Graefen M. Role of nomograms for prostate cancer in 2007. World J. Urol.25(2), 131–142 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Shariat SF, Karakiewicz PI, Roehrborn CG, Kattan MW. An updated catalog of prostate cancer predictive tools. Cancer113(11), 3075–3099 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooperberg MR. Prostate cancer risk assessment: choosing the sharpest tool in the shed. Cancer113(11), 3062–3066 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Roobol MJ, Kerkhof M, Schroder FH et al. Prostate cancer mortality reduction by prostate-specific antigen-based screening adjusted for nonattendance and contamination in the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). Eur. Urol.56(4), 284–294 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR. Prostate-cancer screening. N. Engl. J. Med.361(2), 203 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Schroder FH. Prostate-cancer screening. N. Engl. J. Med.361(2), 203 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Wolters T, Roobol MJ, Steyerberg EW et al. The effect of study arm on prostate cancer treatment in the large screening trial ERSPC. Int. J. Cancer126(10), 2387–2393 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Moore AL, Dimitropoulou P, Lane A et al. Population-based prostate-specific antigen testing in the UK leads to a stage migration of prostate cancer. BJU Int.104(11), 1592–1598 (2009).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aus G, Bergdahl S, Lodding P, Lilja H, Hugosson J. Prostate cancer screening decreases the absolute risk of being diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer – results from a prospective, population-based randomized controlled trial. Eur. Urol.51(3), 659–664 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Cruijsen-Koeter IW, Vis AN, Roobol MJ et al. Comparison of screen detected and clinically diagnosed prostate cancer in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer, Section Rotterdam. J. Urol.174(1), 121–125 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Draisma G, Etzioni R, Tsodikov A et al. Lead time and overdiagnosis in prostate-specific antigen screening: importance of methods and context. J. Natl Cancer Inst.101(6), 374–383 (2009).
   PubMedGoogle 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.95(12), 868–878 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Auvinen A, Maattanen L, Stenman UH et al. Lead-time in prostate cancer screening (Finland). Cancer Causes Control13(3), 279–285 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ et al. Outcomes of men with screen-detected prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance who were managed expectantly. Eur. Urol.55(1), 1–8 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• van den Bergh RC, Vasarainen H, van der Poel HG et al. Short-term outcomes of the prospective multicentre ‘Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance’ study. BJU Int.105(7), 956–962 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Dall’Era MA, Cooperberg MR, Chan JM et al. Active surveillance for early-stage prostate cancer: review of the current literature. Cancer112(8), 1650–1659 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker C. Active surveillance of early prostate cancer: rationale, initial results and future developments. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis.7(3), 184–187 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Klotz L, Zhang L, Lam A, Nam R, Mamedov A, Loblaw A. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J. Clin. Oncol.28(1), 126–131 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Bergh RC, Roemeling S, Roobol MJ, Roobol W, Schroder FH, Bangma CH. Prospective validation of active surveillance in prostate cancer: the PRIAS study. Eur. Urol.52(6), 1560–1563 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans R, Edwards AG, Elwyn G et al. “It’s a maybe test”: men’s experiences of prostate specific antigen testing in primary care. Br. J. Gen. Pract.57(537), 303–310 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlsson S, Aus G, Wessman C, Hugosson J. Anxiety associated with prostate cancer screening with special reference to men with a positive screening test (elevated PSA) – results from a prospective, population-based, randomised study. Eur. J. Cancer43(14), 2109–2116 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korfage IJ, de Koning HJ, Roobol M, Schroder FH, Essink-Bot ML. Prostate cancer diagnosis: the impact on patients’ mental health. Eur. J. Cancer42(2), 165–170 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanda MG, Dunn RL, Michalski J et al. Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors. N. Engl. J. Med.358(12), 1250–1261 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korfage IJ, Essink-Bot ML, Borsboom GJ et al. Five-year follow-up of health-related quality of life after primary treatment of localized prostate cancer. Int. J. Cancer116(2), 291–296 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latini DM, Hart SL, Knight SJ et al. The relationship between anxiety and time to treatment for patients with prostate cancer on surveillance. J. Urol.178(3 Pt 1), 826–831 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Steineck G, Helgesen F, Adolfsson J et al. Quality of life after radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting. N. Engl. J. Med.347(11), 790–796 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Bergh RC, Essink-Bot ML, Roobol MJ et al. Anxiety and distress during active surveillance for early prostate cancer. Cancer115(17), 3868–3878 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun L, Moul JW, Hotaling JM et al. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and PSA velocity for prostate cancer detection in men aged <50 years. BJU Int.99(4), 753–757 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Lilja H, Ulmert D, Bjork T et al. Long-term prediction of prostate cancer up to 25 years before diagnosis of prostate cancer using prostate kallikreins measured at age 44 to 50 years. J. Clin. Oncol.25(4), 431–436 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ulmert D, Cronin AM, Bjork T et al. Prostate-specific antigen at or before age 50 as a predictor of advanced prostate cancer diagnosed up to 25 years later: a case–control study. BMC Med.6, 6 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Greene KL, Albertsen PC, Babaian RJ et al. Prostate specific antigen best practice statement: 2009 update. J. Urol.182(5), 2232–2241 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann. Intern. Med.149(3), 185–191 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaeffer EM, Carter HB, Kettermann A et al. Prostate specific antigen testing among the elderly – when to stop? J. Urol.181(4), 1606–1614 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Lu-Yao GL, Albertsen PC, Moore DF et al. Outcomes of localized prostate cancer following conservative management. JAMA302(11), 1202–1209 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konety BR, Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR. Are age-based criteria the best way to determine eligibility for prostate cancer screening? Ann. Intern. Med.150(3), 220–221 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Ulmert D, Serio AM, O’Brien MF et al. Long-term prediction of prostate cancer: prostate-specific antigen (PSA) velocity is predictive but does not improve the predictive accuracy of a single PSA measurement 15 years or more before cancer diagnosis in a large, representative, unscreened population. J. Clin. Oncol.26(6), 835–841 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Volk RJ, Spann SJ, Cass AR, Hawley ST. Patient education for informed decision making about prostate cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up. Ann. Fam. Med.1(1), 22–28 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Watson E, Hewitson P, Brett J et al. Informed decision making and prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing for prostate cancer: a randomised controlled trial exploring the impact of a brief patient decision aid on men’s knowledge, attitudes and intention to be tested. Patient Educ. Couns.63(3), 367–379 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gattellari M, Ward JE. Does evidence-based information about screening for prostate cancer enhance consumer decision-making? A randomised controlled trial. J. Med. Screen.10(1), 27–39 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Federman DG, Goyal S, Kamina A, Peduzzi P, Concato J. Informed consent for PSA screening: does it happen? Eff. Clin. Pract.2(4), 152–157 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Turkbey B, Pinto PA, Choyke PL. Imaging techniques for prostate cancer: implications for local therapy. Nat. Rev. Urolog.6, 191–203 (2009).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Andriole GL. Overview of pivotal studies for prostate cancer risk reduction, past and present. Urology73(5 Suppl.), S36–S43 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Thompson IM, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM et al. The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer. N. Engl. J. Med.349(3), 215–224 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andriole GL. Headline results of the REDUCE Trial: the effect of dutasteride on prostate cancer risk reduction presented at American Urological Association 104th Annual Scientific Meeting Chicago, IL, USA 25–30 April (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Thompson IM, Chi C, Ankerst DP et al. Effect of finasteride on the sensitivity of PSA for detecting prostate cancer. J. Natl Cancer Inst.98(16), 1128–1133 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ankerst DP, Thompson IM. Sensitivity and specificity of prostate-specific antigen for prostate cancer detection with high rates of biopsy verification. Arch. Ital. Urol. Androl.78(4), 125–129 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Goodman PJ et al. Finasteride improves the sensitivity of digital rectal examination for prostate cancer detection. J. Urol.177(5), 1749–1752 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lucia MS, Darke AK, Goodman PJ et al. Pathologic characteristics of cancers detected in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial: implications for prostate cancer detection and chemoprevention. Cancer Prev. Res. (Phila. PA)1(3), 167–173 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redman MW, Tangen CM, Goodman PJ, Lucia MS, Coltman CA Jr, Thompson IM. Finasteride does not increase the risk of high-grade prostate cancer: a bias-adjusted modeling approach. Cancer Prev. Res. (Phila. Pa)1(3), 174–181 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen YC, Liu KS, Heyden NL et al. Detection bias due to the effect of finasteride on prostate volume: a modeling approach for analysis of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial. J. Natl Cancer Inst.99(18), 1366–1374 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson E JL, Bukach C, Austoker J. The PSA Test and Prostate Cancer: Information for Primary Care. Sheffield: NHS Cancer Screening Programmes (2002).
   Google Scholar