Search

Background: Population-based screening for prostate cancer is currently being evaluated in randomized clinical trials in the United States and in Europe. Side effects arising from the process of screening and from the earlier treatment of screen-detected prostate cancer may be important factors in the evaluation. To examine health-related quality of life (or health status) among men screened for prostate cancer, we conducted a longitudinal study of 626 attenders to the Rotterdam (The Netherlands) prostate cancer screening program and of 500 nonparticipants. Methods: Attenders of the screening program and nonparticipants completed self-assessment questionnaires (SF-36 [i.e., Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey] and EQ-5D [i.e., EuroQol measure for health-related quality of life] health surveys) to measure generic health status, as well as an additional questionnaire for anxiety and items relating to prostate cancer screening. Results: Physical discomfort during digital rectal examination and during transrectal ultrasound was reported by 181 (37%) of 491 men and by 139 (29%) of 487 men, respectively; discomfort during prostate biopsy was reported by 64 (55%) of 116 men. Mean scores for health status and anxiety indicated that the participants did not experience relevant changes in physical, psychological, and social functioning during the screening procedure. However, high levels of anxiety were observed throughout the screening process among men with a high predisposition to anxiety. Similar scores for anxiety predisposition were observed among attenders and nonparticipants. Conclusions: At the group level, we did not find evidence that prostate cancer screening induced important short-term health-status effects, despite the short-lasting side effects related to the biopsy procedure. However, subgroups may experience high levels of anxiety. The implication is that unfavorable health-status effects of prostate cancer screening occur mainly in the treatment phase. [J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90:925-31]

Background: Results from five Swedish randomized trials may provide the most conclusive evidence on the effect of mammographic screening and have been used to forecast the expected reduction in breast cancer mortality in other programs. However, those trials demonstrated different degrees of reduction. The interpretation of observed mortality reduction after long follow-up for women aged 40-49 years at trial entry is both important and controversial. Purpose: We estimated what percentage of the observed mortality reduction for women aged 40-49 years at entry into the five Swedish screening trials might be attributable to screening these women at 50 years of age or older. Moreover, we calculated the most likely percentage mortality reduction for specific screening programs if the Swedish results were generalized and analyzed whether characteristics of each trial might at least partly explain the observed differences in reductions among the trials. Methods: Each Swedish trial was simulated with one underlying computer simulation model (MISCAN--MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis) of the natural history of the disease and the performance of screening, taking into account nine important trial characteristics. Improvement in prognosis for screen-detected case patients was estimated with age-specific reduction for all trials and each trial design as a reference. Results: An expected 7% reduction in breast cancer mortality for women aged 40-49 years at trial entry (relative risk [RR] = 0.93) was determined by computer modeling, assuming no improvement in prognosis for cancers that are screen detected before 50 years of age. This result indicates that, of the overall 10% observed reduction (RR = 0.90) in the five Swedish trials analyzed, most (70%) of this reduction might be attributable to screening these women in later rounds after their 50th birthday. Using additional trial information, predictions of breast cancer mortality reduction in women 50 years or older might be 11% larger than previously expected, assuming that high-quality mammographic screening can be achieved in nationwide programs. For women aged 50-69 years at trial entry, the differences in expected versus observed mortality reduction among the trials are estimated to be relatively small. (Expected mortality reductions range from 24% to 32%.) Conclusions: Results from the Swedish randomized breast cancer-screening trials should be seen as more favorable regarding the effect of mammographic screening in reducing breast cancer mortality for women aged 50-69 years than was estimated earlier. Our analyses also suggest that the improvement in prognosis due to screening for women aged 40-49 years is much smaller than that for women aged 50 years or older. Approximately, 70% of the 10% observed reduction in breast cancer mortality (i.e., 7%) for women aged 40-49 years at trial entry might be attributable to a reduction due to screening these women after they reach age 50. Implications: Detailed screening data for the 40- to 49-year age group of all Swedish trials should be analyzed to specifically estimate the natural history and performance of screening in this age group.

The aim of this review is to discuss advances in the field of screening and early detection of prostate cancer from papers published in 2003.

From 1992–2001, 7 countries in Europe gradually recruited men for the European Randomised Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial. Centres recruit different age groups and have different designs for recruiting and countries have different underlying risks for prostate cancer. Recruitment has reached 163,126 men aged 55–69 at entry now. Our purpose was to calculate the power of the trial and at what point in time can statistically significant differences in prostate cancer mortality be expected. Recruitment data were collected from the screening centres. We calculated the expected number of prostate cancer deaths in each follow-up year, based on national statistics and expected rate in trial entrants. The power was calculated using different assumptions on intervention effect and contamination rate and also if the ERSPC trial would cooperate with other trials. With an assumed 25% intervention effect in men actually screened and a 20% contamination rate, the trial will reach a power of 0.86 in 2008. With an assumed intervention effect of 40%, the power reaches 0.90 in 2003–2004. Pooling data with those of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovary (PLCO) trial early is expected to improve the power to 79% (20% intervention effect) to 92% (40% intervention effect PLCO). Adding more centres with compliance rates lower than 45% decreases the power of the trial. The ERSPC trial has sufficient power to detect a significant difference in prostate cancer mortality between the 2 arms if the true reduction in mortality by screening is 25% or more or if contamination remains limited to 10% if the true effect is 20% or more. If early detection and treatment turns out to have a stronger effect as may be suggested by observational data, the ERSPC trial is likely to conclusively show that within the next 5 years. © 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Two large-scale randomized screening trials, the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovary (PLCO) cancer trial in the USA and the European Randomized Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial in Europe are currently under way, aimed at assessing whether screening reduces prostate cancer mortality. Up to the end of 1998, 102,691 men have been randomized to the intervention arm and 115,322 to the control arm (which represents 83% of the target sample size) from 7 European countries and 10 screening centers in the USA. The principal screening method at all centers is determination of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA). The PLCO trial and some European centers use also digital rectal examination (DRE) as an ancillary screening test. In the core age group (55–69 years), 3,362 of 32,486 men screened (10%) had a serum PSA concentration of 4 ng/ml or greater, which is 1 cut-off for biopsy (performed in 84%). An additional 6% was referred for further assessment based on other criteria, with much less efficiency. Differences in PSA by country are largely attributable to the age structure of the study population. The mean age-specific PSA levels are lower in the PLCO trial (1.64 ng/ml [in the age group 55–59 years], 1.80 [60–64 years] and 2.18 [65–69 years) than in the ERSPC trial (1.28–1.71 [55–59], 1.75–2.87 [60–64] and 2.48–3.06 [65–69 years]). Detection rates at the first screen in the ERSPC trial range from 11 to 42/1,000 men screened and reflect underlying differences in incidence rates and screening procedures. In centers with consent to randomization design, adherence in the screening arm is 91%, but less than half of the men in the target population are enrolled in the trial. In population-based centers in which men were randomized prior to consent, all eligible subjects are enrolled, but only about two-thirds of the men in the intervention arm undergo screening. Considerable progress has been made in both trials. Enrollment will be completed in 2001. A substantial number of early prostate cancers have been detected. The differences between countries seem to reflect both underlying prostate cancer incidence and screening policy. The trials have the power to show definitive results in 2005–2008. © 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Our objective was to evaluate the on-going European pilot project for breast cancer screening in Navarra, Spain, and to predict the effects and costs of the programme in the long run. Observed results in Navarra, consisting of more than 100,000 screens, were compared with expected results. A microsimulation screening analysis model was used that included demographical, epidemiological and screening characteristics of Navarra. Alternative assumptions on epidemiological and screening characteristics were also addressed. The observed detection rate (5.9 per 1,000 screened women) in the first round was 18% higher than expected; the observed rate in the subsequent round (2.9) was 17% lower than expected. Longer pre-clinical durations, lower sensitivity or the existence of a high-risk group in Navarra could not satisfactorily explain the first and second round results together. Nevertheless, the programme will have an important health benefit for the women involved, due to an important trend in incidence in recent years and the relatively unfavourable clinical stage distribution in Navarra. The proportion T2+ cancers that will be prevented after 10 years of screening amounts to 36%. The annual mortality reduction in steady state is expected to range between 17% (if the observed rates in the second round indicate real screening performance) to 23% (if the first round indicates real performance). Our results demonstrate that a high detection rate in the first round is insufficient to evaluate the quality of a programme. Interval cancer rates, results of the subsequent round and size distributions are also crucial indicators of the quality of the screening programme and should be analysed in their specific context. Int. J. Cancer 73:464–469, 1997. © 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Based on an extensive cost-effectiveness analysis, the Dutch nation-wide breast cancer screening programme started in 1990, providing a biennial screen examination to women aged 50 to 69 years. The programme is monitored by the National Evaluation Team, which annually collects tabulated regional evaluation data to determine performance indicators. This study presents (trends in) the outcomes of initial and subsequent screening rounds, 1990–1995, and compares them to the predictions of the cost-effectiveness-analysis. Up to 1996, 88% of the target population was covered by the programme and more than 2.4 × 10⁶ women were invited. The overall attendance rate was 77.5% with little differences between screening rounds and age groups; the highest rate was found in non-urbanised areas (82.4%). Of 1,000 initially (and 2 years thereafter) screened women, 13.4 (6.6) were referred for further investigation, 9.7 (4.4) were biopsied and 6.4 (3.4) had breast cancer. The positive predictive values of screen test and biopsy were 47% (51%) and 66% (78%), respectively. DCIS was diagnosed in 0.9 (0.5) and invasive cancers ≤10 mm in 1.5 (1.0) per 1,000 screens. Lymph node metastases were found in 28% (24%) of the invasive cancers. Except the increasing attendance, which was much higher than expected, the results were fairly constant over the years. Contrary to initial screens, the results of subsequent screens did not fulfil expectations with regard to breast cancer detection and tumour size distribution. We conclude that the nation-wide screening programme is being implemented successfully. Given the results, the programme should contribute to a substantial breast cancer mortality reduction in the future. The discrepancy between observed and expected results in subsequent screens has to be watched carefully. Int. J. Cancer 75:694–698, 1998.© 1998 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

The authors report a prospective study comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with mammography for screening in women having an estimated cumulative lifetime risk of breast cancer of at least 15% because of a familial or genetic predisposition. A clinical breast examination was done every 6 months and imaging studies (with independent readings) every 12 months. The study group included 1909 eligible women 25 to 70 years of age, 358 of whom were carriers of germline mutations. A BRCA1mutation was by far the most common pathogenic mutation.

The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends biennial breast cancer mammography screening for women aged 50 to 74 years. A large body of evidence has shown a favorable balance of benefits and harms for screening in this age group. All current guidelines support this recommendation. However, the US Preventive Services Task Force did not recommend routine screening before age 50 based on the high false-positive rate in younger women. A strategy focused on screening only the younger women at greatest risk of breast cancer would address concerns over the high ratio of harm to benefit.