Search

The article discusses the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in reducing overdiagnosis of prostate cancer in men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. Initially, there was hesitation in using active surveillance for low-grade disease due to concerns about missing high-grade disease. However, recent studies have shown that MRI can help detect high-grade disease with targeted biopsies, reducing the need for systematic biopsies. The article presents the findings of the Swedish GOTEBORG-2 trial, which showed a lower risk of detecting low-grade disease and a lower proportion of men with higher-grade disease in the MRI-targeted biopsy group compared to the systematic biopsy group. However, the MRI-targeted biopsy approach also led to a delay in diagnosing higher-grade disease in some men. The article concludes that performing MRI in everyone with an elevated PSA level is resource-intensive, but the experimental approach used in the trial minimized the number and extent of biopsies. Overall, the use of MRI in the context of PSA-based screening is evolving, and further research is needed to determine the most effective and cost-efficient strategies. [Extracted from the article]

Background: The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial assessed the effect of screening with prostate-specific antigen and a digital rectal examination on prostate cancer mortality. Another endpoint of interest was the burden of total metastatic disease.Methods: All men in PLCO were assessed for metastatic prostate cancer at diagnosis; men with clinical stage I/II disease were assessed for metastatic progression. The rate of total metastatic disease was defined as metastases found either at diagnosis or through progression divided by person-years (PYs) of follow-up for all men in the trial. Metastatic progression rates were computed among men with clinical stage I/II prostate cancer. Survival among men with metastases at diagnosis was compared with survival among men with metastatic progression.Results: Among 38,340 men in the intervention arm and 38,343 men in the control arm in PLCO, there were 4974 and 4699 prostate cancer cases, respectively. The rates of total metastatic disease were 4.72 and 4.83 per 10,000 PYs in the intervention and control arms, respectively (rate ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.81-1.18). The rates of metastatic progression among men with clinical stage I/II prostate cancer were 43.7 and 50.5 per 10,000 PYs in the intervention and control arms, respectively (P = .30). Prostate cancer-specific 5- and 10-year survival rates were significantly worse for men with metastatic progression (24% and 19%, respectively) than men with metastases at diagnosis (40% and 26%, respectively).Conclusions: Rates of total metastatic disease and metastatic progression were similar across arms in PLCO. Survival was worse for men with metastatic progression in comparison with those with metastatic disease at diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine prostate cancer (PCa) incidence and mortality by arm in the randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial. Patients and Methods: Patients aged 55–74 years at 10 screening centres were randomized between 1993 and 2001 to an intervention or usual care arm. Patients in the intervention arm received six annual prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) tests and four annual digital rectal examinations. The patients were followed for PCa incidence and for mortality via active follow‐up processes and by linkage to state cancer registries and the National Death Index. For cancers identified through active follow‐up, trial abstractors recorded the mode of diagnosis (screen‐detected, symptomatic, other). Results: A total of 38 340 patients were randomized to the intervention arm and 38 343 to a usual care arm. The median follow‐up for mortality was 16.9 (intervention) and 16.7 years (usual care). There were 333 (intervention) and 352 (usual care) PCa cancer deaths, giving rates (per 10 000 person‐years) of 5.5 and 5.9, respectively, and a rate ratio (RR) of 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81–1.08; P = 0.38). The RR for overall PCa incidence was 1.05 (95% CI 1.01–1.09). The RRs by Gleason category were 1.17 (95% CI 1.11–1.23) for Gleason 2–6, 1.00 (95% CI 0.93–1.07) for Gleason 7 and 0.89 (95% CI 0.80–0.99) for Gleason 8–10 disease. By mode of detection, during the trial's screening phase, 13% of intervention arm vs 27% of usual care arm cases were symptomatic; post‐screening, these percentages were 18% in each arm. Conclusion: After almost 17 years of median follow‐up, there was no significant reduction in PCa mortality in the intervention compared with the usual care arm. There was a significant increase in Gleason 2–6 disease and a significant reduction in Gleason 8–10 disease in the intervention compared with the usual care arm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides information on extensive screening in the U.S. for prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen (PSA). The article provides information on effective division of medical community and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), deaths from prostate cancer, and screening phase.

BACKGROUND Two large-scale prostate cancer screening trials using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) have given conflicting results in terms of the efficacy of such screening. One of those trials, the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial, previously reported outcomes with 13 years of follow-up. This study presents updated findings from the PLCO trial. METHODS The PLCO trial randomized subjects from 1993 to 2001 to an intervention or control arm. Intervention-arm men received annual PSA tests for 6 years and digital rectal examinations for 4 years. This study used a linkage with the National Death Index to extend mortality follow-up to a maximum of 19 years after randomization. RESULTS Men were randomized to the intervention arm (n = 38,340) or the control arm (n = 38,343). The median follow-up time was 14.8 years (25th/75th, 12.7/16.5 years) in the intervention arm and 14.7 years (25th/75th, 12.6/16.4 years) in the control arm. There were 255 deaths from prostate cancer in the intervention arm and 244 deaths from prostate cancer in the control arm; this meant a rate ratio (RR) of 1.04 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-1.24). The RR for all-cause mortality was 0.977 (95% CI, 0.950-1.004). It was estimated that 86% of the men in the control arm and 99% of the men in the intervention arm received any PSA testing during the trial, and the estimated yearly screening-phase PSA testing rates were 46% and 84%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Extended follow-up of the PLCO trial over a median of 15 years continues to indicate no reduction in prostate cancer mortality for the intervention arm versus the control arm. Because of the high rate of control-arm PSA testing, this finding can be viewed as showing no benefit of organized screening versus opportunistic screening. Cancer 2017;123:592-599. © 2016 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective • To examine mortality and morbidity after prostate biopsy in the intervention arm of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening (PLCO) trial. Subjects and Methods • Abstractors from the PLCO trial recorded the types and dates of diagnostic follow-up procedures after positive screens and documented the types and dates of resultant complications. Cancers and deaths among the participants were tracked. • The mortality rate in the 120-day period after prostate biopsy was compared with a control rate of deaths in the 120-day period after a negative screen in men without biopsy. • Multivariate analysis was performed to control for potential confounders, including age, comorbidities and smoking. • Rates of any complication, infectious and non-infectious complications were computed among men with a negative biopsy.Multivariate analysis was used to examine the risk factors for complications. Results • Of the 37 345 men enrolled in the PLCO trial (intervention arm), 4861 had at least one biopsy after a positive screen and 28 661 had a negative screen and no biopsy. • The 120-day mortality rate after biopsy was 0.95 (per 1000), compared with the control group rate of 1.8; the multivariate relative risk was 0.49 (95% CI: 0.2-1.1). • Among 3706 negative biopsies, the rates (per 1000) of any complication, infectious and non-infections complications were 20.2, 7.8 and 13.0, respectively. • A history of prostate enlargement or inflammation was significantly associated with higher rates of both infectious (odds ratio [OR] = 3.7) and non-infectious (OR = 2.2) complications. Black race was associated with a higher infectious complications rate (OR = 7.1) and repeat biopsy was associated with lower rates of non-infectious complications (OR = 0.3). Conclusion • Mortality rates were not found to be higher after prostate biopsy in the PLCO trial and complications were relatively infrequent, with several risk factors identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial is a large-scale research effort conducted by the National Cancer Institute. PLCO offers an example of coordinated research by both the extramural and intramural communities of the National Institutes of Health. The purpose of this article is to describe the PLCO research resource and how it is managed and to assess the productivity and the costs associated with this resource. Such an in-depth analysis of a single large-scale project can shed light on questions such as how large-scale projects should be managed, what metrics should be used to assess productivity, and how costs can be compared with productivity metrics. A comprehensive publication analysis identified 335 primary research publications resulting from research using PLCO data and biospecimens from 2000 to 2012. By the end of 2012, a total of 9679 citations (excluding self-citations) have resulted from this body of research publications, with an average of 29.7 citations per article, and an h index of 45, which is comparable with other large-scale studies, such as the Nurses' Health Study. In terms of impact on public health, PLCO trial results have been used by the US Preventive ServicesTask Force in making recommendations concerning prostate and ovarian cancer screening. The overall cost of PLCO was $454 million over 20 years, adjusted to 2011 dollars, with approximately $37 million for the collection, processing, and storage of biospecimens, including blood samples, buccal cells, and pathology tissues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND. Two recent chemoprevention trials demonstrated significant reductions in overall prostate cancer incidence. However, a possible increase in high-grade disease has raised concerns that the harms of the drugs, including mortality because of high-grade disease, may outweigh the benefits. The authors attempted to estimate the effect of these drugs on prostate cancer mortality to be able to better evaluate the cost-benefit tradeoff. METHODS. The authors analyzed prostate cancer incidence in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) and Reduction by Dutasteride of Prostate Cancer Events (REDUCE) trial, which evaluated finasteride and the related compound dutasteride, respectively (both vs placebo). They used 13-year prostate cancer survival data from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) trial to project prostate cancer mortality from incidence patterns; survival rates were applied to incident cancers according to prognostic strata, which were defined by Gleason score, prostate-specific antigen level, and clinical stage. For PCPT, the analysis was performed using both original trial results and previously published adjusted analyses that attempted to account for artifacts related to the drugs' effect on prostate volume. RESULTS. For the PCPT trial, the estimated relative risk (RR) for prostate cancer mortality was 1.02 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.85-1.23) using the original trial results and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.72-1.06) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.76-1.09) based on the adjusted PCPT analyses. For the REDUCE trial, the RR for prostate cancer mortality was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.80-1.08). CONCLUSIONS. Projecting a mortality outcome of the PCPT and REDUCE trials as an approach to weighing benefits versus harms suggests at most a small increase in prostate cancer mortality in the treatment arms, and possibly a modest decrease. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE To describe the results of the first four rounds (T0-T3) of prostate cancer screening in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial (designed to determine the value of screening in the four cancers), that for prostate cancer is evaluating whether annual screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and a digital rectal examination (DRE) reduces prostate cancer-specific mortality. SUBJECTS AND METHODS In all, 38 349 men aged 55–74 years were randomized to undergo annual screening with PSA (abnormal >4.0 ng/mL) and a DRE. The follow-up of abnormal screening results was at the discretion of subjects’ physicians. PLCO staff obtained records related to diagnostic follow-up of positive screen results. RESULTS Compliance with screening decreased slightly from 89% at baseline to 85% at T3. Both PSA positivity rates (range 7.7–8.8% at T0-T3) and DRE positivity rates (range 6.8–7.6% at T0-T3) were relatively constant over time. The positive predictive value (PPV) of a PSA level of >4.0 ng/mL decreased from 17.9% at T0 to 10.4–12.3% at T1-T3; the PPV for DRE (in the absence of a positive PSA test) was constant over time (2.9–3.6%). Cancer was diagnosed in 1902 men (4.9%). Screen-detected cancers at T0 (549) were more likely to be clinical stage III/IV (5.8%) and to have a Gleason score of 7–10 (34%) than screen-detected cancers at T1-T3 (1.5–4.2% stage III/IV and 24–27% Gleason score 7–10 among 1054 cases). CONCLUSION The present findings on serial prostate screening are similar to those reported from other multi-round screening studies. Determining the effect of PSA screening on prostate cancer mortality awaits further follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study which examined the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and PSA velocity (PSAV) in a group of men who were diagnosed with prostate cancer and who were enrolled in a prostate cancer screening trial. PSA levels and PSAV were examined as risk factors for an elevated biopsy Gleason score. The study also examined whether PSAV and/or PSA level in patients who underwent prostatectomy, when combined with clinical predictors had better predictive ability for advanced pathologic stage compared with clinical predictors alone.

OBJECTIVE To determine patterns of repeat prostate biopsy in a cohort of men undergoing prostate cancer screening who have a negative initial biopsy. SUBJECTS AND METHODS The Prostate, Colorectal, Lung, and Ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial is an ongoing study the prostate component of which consists of six annual screens with measurements of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and a digital rectal examination (DRE). The diagnostic follow-up of positive screening results is done by the subject’s healthcare provider outside the purview of the PLCO. We analysed the experience of repeat biopsy in men in the PLCO with an initial negative biopsy. Men were divided by indication for initial biopsy into those with suspicious PSA levels and those with suspicious DRE findings. RESULTS The probability of having a repeat biopsy within 3 years of initial biopsy was 43% for 1736 men with suspicious PSA levels and 13% for 1025 men with suspicious DRE findings. Rates of third and fourth biopsy after a previous negative biopsy were similar to the initial repeat biopsy rate in PSA-positive men. Most men had a repeat biopsy only after having an additional round of screening. The PSA level and PSA velocity determined after initial biopsy were independent risk factors for a repeat biopsy, both in PSA-positive and DRE-positive men. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia was a risk factor for repeat biopsy before any repeat PSA or DRE testing. CONCLUSION The experience of this cohort should be generally representative of patterns of care for repeat biopsy in men undergoing periodic screening. These data can provide context to the debate over optimum practices for repeat biopsy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Prostate cancer mortality in areas with high and low prostate cancer incidence," by P. Stattin and colleagues in the 2014 issue.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Prostate Cancer Mortality in Areas With High and Low Prostate Cncer Incidence," which appeared in the 2014 issue.

Abstract: Background: The prostate component of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) randomized screening trial demonstrated no mortality effect of screening. Here we analyze prostate cancer specific survival in PLCO and its relation to screening. Methods: 76,693 men aged 55–74 were randomized to usual care (n =38,350) or intervention (n =38,343). Intervention arm men received annual prostate-specific antigen (6 years) and digital rectal exam (4 years). Men were followed for cancer diagnosis and mortality through 13 years. Medical record abstractors confirmed prostate cancer diagnoses, stage and grade. Prostate-specific survival in PLCO cases was analyzed using Kaplan–Meier analysis and proportional hazards modeling. We utilized data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program to compute expected survival in PLCO and compared this to observed. Results: There was no significant difference in prostate-specific survival rates between arms; 10 year survival rates were 94.7% (intervention, n =4250 cases) versus 93.5% (usual care, n =3815 cases). Within the intervention arm, cases never screened in PLCO had lower 10 year survival rates (82%) than screen detected or interval (following a negative screen) cases, both around 95.5%. The ratio of observed to expected 10 year prostate-specific death (1-survival) rates was 0.59 (95% CI: 0.51–0.68) for all PLCO cases, 0.66 (95% CI: 0.51–0.81) for Gleason 5–7 cases and 1.07 (95% CI: 0.87–1.3) for Gleason 8–10 cases. Conclusion: Prostate cancer specific survival in PLCO was comparable across arms and significantly better than expected based on nationwide population data. How much of the better survival is due to a healthy volunteer effect and to lead-time and overdiagnosis biases is not readily determinable. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objective: Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy for diagnostic workup for prostate cancer (PCa) has a substantial false negative rate. We sought to estimate PCa incidence and mortality following negative biopsy in a cohort of men undergoing prostate cancer screening.Subjects and Methods: The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial randomized participants 55-74 years to an intervention vs control arm. Intervention arm men received annual prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests for 6 years and digital rectal exams (DRE) for 4 years. We examined the cohort of men with a positive PSA (> 4 ng/mL) or DRE screen followed within one year by a negative biopsy. PCa incidence and mortality rates from time of first negative biopsy were analyzed as a function of PSA level at diagnosis and other factors. Cumulative incidence and mortality rates accounting for competing risk were estimated. Multivariate proportional hazards regression was utilized to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) of PCa outcomes by PSA level, controlling for age and race.Results: The negative biopsy cohort included 2855 men. Median (25th/75th) age at biopsy was 65 (61/69) years; biopsies occurred between 1994 and 2006. Median (25/75th) follow-up was 13.2 (6.5/16.8) years for incidence and 16.6 (12.3/19.2) years for mortality. 740 PCa cases were diagnosed, with 33 PCa deaths. Overall 20-year cumulative PCa incidence and mortality rates were 26.4% (95% CI: 24.8-28.1) and 1.2% (95% CI: 0.9-1.7), respectively. HRs for PCa incidence and mortality increased significantly with increasing PSA.Conclusion: The mortality rate from PCa through 20 years following a negative biopsy is low. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) demonstrated that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening significantly reduced prostate cancer mortality (rate ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.91). The US Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) trial indicated no such reduction but had a wide 95% CI (rate ratio for prostate cancer mortality, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.87-1.36). Standard meta-analyses are unable to account for key differences between the trials that can impact the estimated effects of screening and the trials' point estimates.Methods: The authors calibrated 2 microsimulation models to individual-level incidence and mortality data from 238,936 men participating in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. A cure parameter for the underlying efficacy of screening was estimated by the models separately for each trial. The authors changed step-by-step major known differences in trial settings, including enrollment and attendance patterns, screening intervals, PSA thresholds, biopsy receipt, control arm contamination, and primary treatment, to reflect a more ideal protocol situation and differences between the trials.Results: Using the cure parameter estimated for the ERSPC, the models projected 19% to 21% and 6% to 8%, respectively, prostate cancer mortality reductions in the ERSPC and PLCO settings. Using this cure parameter, the models projected a reduction of 37% to 43% under annual screening with 100% attendance and biopsy compliance and no contamination. The cure parameter estimated for the PLCO trial was 0.Conclusions: The observed cancer mortality reduction in screening trials appears to be highly sensitive to trial protocol and practice settings. Accounting for these differences, the efficacy of PSA screening in the PLCO setting is not necessarily inconsistent with ERSPC results. Cancer 2018;124:1197-206. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The prostate component of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial was undertaken to determine whether there is a reduction in prostate cancer mortality from screening using serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and digital rectal examination (DRE). Mortality after 7–10 years of follow-up has been reported previously. We report extended follow-up to 13 years after the trial. Methods A total of 76 685 men, aged 55–74 years, were enrolled at 10 screening centers between November 1993 and July 2001 and randomly assigned to the intervention (organized screening of annual PSA testing for 6 years and annual DRE for 4 years; 38 340 men) and control (usual care, which sometimes included opportunistic screening; 38 345 men) arms. Screening was completed in October 2006. All incident prostate cancers and deaths from prostate cancer through 13 years of follow-up or through December 31, 2009, were ascertained. Relative risks (RRs) were estimated as the ratio of observed rates in the intervention and control arms, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated assuming a Poisson distribution for the number of events. Poisson regression modeling was used to examine the interactions with respect to prostate cancer mortality between trial arm and age, comorbidity status, and pretrial PSA testing. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results Approximately 92% of the study participants were followed to 10 years and 57% to 13 years. At 13 years, 4250 participants had been diagnosed with prostate cancer in the intervention arm compared with 3815 in the control arm. Cumulative incidence rates for prostate cancer in the intervention and control arms were 108.4 and 97.1 per 10 000 person-years, respectively, resulting in a relative increase of 12% in the intervention arm (RR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.07 to 1.17). After 13 years of follow-up, the cumulative mortality rates from prostate cancer in the intervention and control arms were 3.7 and 3.4 deaths per 10 000 person-years, respectively, resulting in a non-statistically significant difference between the two arms (RR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.87 to 1.36). No statistically significant interactions with respect to prostate cancer mortality were observed between trial arm and age (Pinteraction = .81), pretrial PSA testing (Pinteraction = .52), and comorbidity (Pinteraction = .68). Conclusions After 13 years of follow-up, there was no evidence of a mortality benefit for organized annual screening in the PLCO trial compared with opportunistic screening, which forms part of usual care, and there was no apparent interaction with age, baseline comorbidity, or pretrial PSA testing. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: The 5-year overall survival rate of lung cancer patients is approximately 15%. Most patients are diagnosed with advanced-stage disease and have shorter survival rates than patients with early-stage disease. Although screening for lung cancer has the potential to increase early diagnosis, it has not been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality rates. In 1993, the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial was initiated specifically to determine whether screening would reduce mortality rates from PLCO cancers. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: The benefit of screening for prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and digital rectal examination (DRE) is uncertain and is under evaluation in a randomized prospective trial, the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial. Although the final results are several years away, the initial round of screening is complete. We describe the population enrolled in the PLCO trial, their baseline PSA and DRE screening results, and diagnostic follow-up results during the first year of follow-up. Methods: A total of 38350 men were randomly as- signed to the screening arm of the PLCO trial from November 1993 through June 2001. Men were advised to seek diagnostic follow-up from their primary care provider if their DRE was suspicious for cancer and/or if their serum PSA level was higher than 4 ng/mL. PLCO trial staff obtained records related to diagnostic follow-up. Results: Compliance with both screening tests was high (more than 89%). At screening, 7.5% of men had a positive DRE (i.e., suspicious for cancer) and 7.9% had a PSA level higher than 4 ng/mL. Of the men with positive screening tests, 74.2% underwent additional diagnostic testing, and 3 1.5% underwent a prostatic biopsy within 1 year. Overall, 1.4% of the men in the screening arm were diagnosed with prostate cancer, the majority of whom had clinically localized cancer. These compliance, biopsy, and cancer detection rates appear to be representative of contemporary practice patterns. Conclusion: The PLCO trial is evaluating PSA- and DRE-based screening for prostate cancer in a clinically valid manner. Whether such screening will result in a reduction of prostate cancer mortality cannot be answered until the randomized comparison is completed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]