Quality-of-life effects of prostate-specific antigen screening

Benefits and harms of computed tomography lung cancer screening strategies: a comparative modeling study for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

BACKGROUND

The optimum screening policy for lung cancer is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To identify efficient computed tomography (CT) screening scenarios in which relatively more lung cancer deaths are averted for fewer CT screening examinations.

DESIGN

Comparative modeling study using 5 independent models.

DATA SOURCES

The National Lung Screening Trial; the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening trial; the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program; and the U.S. Smoking History Generator.

TARGET POPULATION

U.S. cohort born in 1950.

TIME HORIZON

Cohort followed from ages 45 to 90 years.

PERSPECTIVE

Societal.

INTERVENTION

576 scenarios with varying eligibility criteria (age, pack-years of smoking, years since quitting) and screening intervals.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Benefits included lung cancer deaths averted or life-years gained. Harms included CT examinations, false-positive results (including those obtained from biopsy/surgery), overdiagnosed cases, and radiation-related deaths.

RESULTS OF BEST-CASE SCENARIO

The most advantageous strategy was annual screening from ages 55 through 80 years for ever-smokers with a smoking history of at least 30 pack-years and ex-smokers with less than 15 years since quitting. It would lead to 50% (model ranges, 45% to 54%) of cases of cancer being detected at an early stage (stage I/II), 575 screening examinations per lung cancer death averted, a 14% (range, 8.2% to 23.5%) reduction in lung cancer mortality, 497 lung cancer deaths averted, and 5250 life-years gained per the 100,000-member cohort. Harms would include 67,550 false-positive test results, 910 biopsies or surgeries for benign lesions, and 190 overdiagnosed cases of cancer (3.7% of all cases of lung cancer [model ranges, 1.4% to 8.3%]).

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

The number of cancer deaths averted for the scenario varied across models between 177 and 862; the number of overdiagnosed cases of cancer varied between 72 and 426.

LIMITATIONS

Scenarios assumed 100% screening adherence. Data derived from trials with short duration were extrapolated to lifetime follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Annual CT screening for lung cancer has a favorable benefit-harm ratio for individuals aged 55 through 80 years with 30 or more pack-years' exposure to smoking.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Cancer Institute.

Comparative analysis of 5 lung cancer natural history and screening models that reproduce outcomes of the NLST and PLCO trials

BACKGROUND

The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated that low-dose computed tomography screening is an effective way of reducing lung cancer (LC) mortality. However, optimal screening strategies have not been determined to date and it is uncertain whether lighter smokers than those examined in the NLST may also benefit from screening. To address these questions, it is necessary to first develop LC natural history models that can reproduce NLST outcomes and simulate screening programs at the population level.

METHODS

Five independent LC screening models were developed using common inputs and calibration targets derived from the NLST and the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO). Imputation of missing information regarding smoking, histology, and stage of disease for a small percentage of individuals and diagnosed LCs in both trials was performed. Models were calibrated to LC incidence, mortality, or both outcomes simultaneously.

RESULTS

Initially, all models were calibrated to the NLST and validated against PLCO. Models were found to validate well against individuals in PLCO who would have been eligible for the NLST. However, all models required further calibration to PLCO to adequately capture LC outcomes in PLCO never-smokers and light smokers. Final versions of all models produced incidence and mortality outcomes in the presence and absence of screening that were consistent with both trials.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors developed 5 distinct LC screening simulation models based on the evidence in the NLST and PLCO. The results of their analyses demonstrated that the NLST and PLCO have produced consistent results. The resulting models can be important tools to generate additional evidence to determine the effectiveness of lung cancer screening strategies using low-dose computed tomography.

Empirical estimates of prostate cancer overdiagnosis by age and prostate-specific antigen

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer screening depends on a careful balance of benefits, in terms of reduced prostate cancer mortality, and harms, in terms of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. We aimed to estimate the effect on overdiagnosis of restricting prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing by age and baseline PSA.

METHODS

Estimates of the effects of age on overdiagnosis were based on population based incidence data from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database. To investigate the relationship between PSA and overdiagnosis, we used two separate cohorts subject to PSA testing in clinical trials (n = 1,577 and n = 1,197) and a population-based cohort of Swedish men not subject to PSA-screening followed for 25 years (n = 1,162).

RESULTS

If PSA testing had been restricted to younger men, the number of excess cases associated with the introduction of PSA in the US would have been reduced by 85%, 68% and 42% for age cut-offs of 60, 65 and 70, respectively. The risk that a man with screen-detected cancer at age 60 would not subsequently lead to prostate cancer morbidity or mortality decreased exponentially as PSA approached conventional biopsy thresholds. For PSAs below 1 ng/ml, the risk of a positive biopsy is 65 (95% CI 18.2, 72.9) times greater than subsequent prostate cancer mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate cancer overdiagnosis has a strong relationship to age and PSA level. Restricting screening in men over 60 to those with PSA above median (>1 ng/ml) and screening men over 70 only in selected circumstances would importantly reduce overdiagnosis and change the ratio of benefits to harms of PSA-screening.

Is prostate cancer screening cost-effective? A microsimulation model of prostate-specific antigen-based screening for British Columbia, Canada

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer may reduce mortality, but it incurs considerable risk of over diagnosis and potential harm to quality of life. Our objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PSA screening, with and without adjustment for quality of life, for the British Columbia (BC) population. We adapted an existing natural history model using BC incidence, treatment, cost and mortality patterns. The modeled mortality benefit of screening derives from a stage-shift mechanism, assuming mortality reduction consistent with the European Study of Randomized Screening for Prostate Cancer. The model projected outcomes for 40-year-old men under 14 combinations of screening ages and frequencies. Cost and utility estimates were explored with deterministic sensitivity analysis. The incremental cost-effectiveness of regular screening ranged from $36,300/LYG, for screening every four years from ages 55 to 69 years, to $588,300/LYG, for screening every two years from ages 40 to 74 years. The marginal benefits of increasing screening frequency to 2 years or starting screening at age 40 years were small and came at significant cost. After utility adjustment, all screening strategies resulted in a loss of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs); however, this result was very sensitive to utility estimates. Plausible outcomes under a range of screening strategies inform discussion of prostate cancer screening policy in BC and similar jurisdictions. Screening may be cost-effective, but the sensitivity of results to utility values suggests individual preferences for quality versus quantity of life should be a key consideration.

A literature review of cost-effectiveness analyses of prostate-specific antigen test in prostate cancer screening

Prostate cancer is the most common non-skin cancer in American men, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing is its common screening procedure. In May 2012, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended against PSA-based screening. These recommendations contradict the current recommendations of other organizations such as the American Urological Association. The authors conducted a systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane to examine the published literature reporting the cost-effectiveness of PSA-based screening. The authors found ten studies each for US and non-US jurisdiction population. All reviewed studies concluded PSA-based screening to be cost effective in younger men (≤60 years of age) and at higher PSA levels (≥3 ng/ml). Further cost-effectiveness analyses reflecting latest clinical practice and current perspectives regarding adverse outcomes of potentially unnecessary treatment are required, especially from the US government perspective.

Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer

CONTEXT

Although prostate cancer (PCa) screening reduces the incidence of advanced disease and mortality, trade-offs include overdiagnosis and resultant overtreatment.

OBJECTIVE

To review primary data on PCa overdiagnosis and overtreatment.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Electronic searches were conducted in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and Embase from inception to July 2013 for original articles on PCa overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Supplemental articles were identified through hand searches.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The lead-time and excess-incidence approaches are the main ways used to estimate overdiagnosis in epidemiological studies, with estimates varying widely. The estimated number of PCa cases needed to be diagnosed to save a life has ranged from 48 down to 5 with increasing follow-up. In clinical studies, generally lower rates of overdiagnosis have been reported based on the frequency of low-grade minimal tumors at radical prostatectomy (1.7-46.8%). Autopsy studies have reported PCa in 18.5-38.5%, although not all are low grade or low volume. Factors influencing overdiagnosis include the study population, screening protocol, and background incidence, limiting generalizability between settings. Reported rates of overtreatment vary widely in the literature, although contemporary international studies suggest increasing use of conservative management.

CONCLUSIONS

Epidemiological, clinical, and autopsy studies have been used to examine PCa overdiagnosis, with estimates ranging widely from 1.7% to 67%. Correspondingly, estimates of overtreatment vary widely based on patient features and may be declining internationally. Careful patient selection for screening and reducing overtreatment are important to preserve the benefits and reduce the downstream harms of prostate-specific antigen testing. Because all of these estimates are extremely population and context specific, this must be considered when using these data to inform policy.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Screening reduces spread and death from prostate cancer (PCa) but overdiagnoses some low-risk tumors that may not have caused harm. Because treatment has potential side effects, it is critical that not all patients with PCa receive aggressive treatment.

Screening for prostate cancer: current status of ERSPC and screening-related issues

The "European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer" (ERSPC) was initiated in 1993 and up to 1998 six other European countries were joined. The main goal is to establish the effect of Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA)-based screening on prostate cancer (PCa) mortality with morbidity as secondary end point. At present, with 11 and 12 years of follow-up significant relative reductions of 21 % and 31 % relating to both end points have been reported. The diagnosis of non-life threatening PCA (over diagnosis) is estimated to be in the range of 50 % and represents the main "harm", which prevents the introduction of population-based screening. As a result, the prevention of over diagnosis is now given top research priority. PSA as a screening test has poor performance characteristics including a low specificity. With the cut-off value of 3.0 ng/ml chosen within ERSPC, about 25 % of men aged 55--69 test positively, 75 % have "negative" test results, which do not definitely exclude the presence of PCa. Research to establish empirical schemes of follow-up based on PSA levels and other parameters are ongoing worldwide. In the meantime, we are, by approximation, capable to identify over diagnosed PCa detected by screening. Active surveillance can be applied to avoid side effects and expenses of treatment and is, among others, based on the grade of differentiation determined on biopsies. The assignment of the most favorable "Gleason score 6" is a crucial decision element. Unfortunately, biopsy pathology underestimates the true degree of PC aggressiveness by 25--30 % which establishes the need of careful follow-up.

Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR-guided targeted biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in diagnosing prostate cancer: a modelling study from a health care perspective

BACKGROUND

The current diagnostic strategy using transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUSGB) raises concerns regarding overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer (PCa). Interest in integrating multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and magnetic resonance-guided biopsy (MRGB) into the diagnostic pathway to reduce overdiagnosis and improve grading is gaining ground, but it remains uncertain whether this image-based strategy is cost-effective.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of multiparametric MRI and MRGB compared with TRUSGB.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A combined decision tree and Markov model for men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (>4 ng/ml) was developed. Input data were derived from systematic literature searches, meta-analyses, and expert opinion.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and health care costs of both strategies were modelled over 10 yr after initial suspicion of PCa. Probabilistic and threshold analyses were performed to assess uncertainty.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Despite uncertainty around the presented cost-effectiveness estimates, our results suggest that the MRI strategy is cost-effective compared with the standard of care. Expected costs per patient were € 2423 for the MRI strategy and € 2392 for the TRUSGB strategy. Corresponding QALYs were higher for the MRI strategy (7.00 versus 6.90), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of € 323 per QALY. Threshold analysis revealed that MRI is cost-effective when sensitivity of MRGB is ≥ 20%. The probability that the MRI strategy is cost-effective is around 80% at willingness to pay thresholds higher than € 2000 per QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Total costs of the MRI strategy are almost equal with the standard of care, while reduction of overdiagnosis and overtreatment with the MRI strategy leads to an improvement in quality of life.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We compared costs and quality of life (QoL) of the standard "blind" diagnostic technique with an image-based technique for men with suspicion of prostate cancer. Our results suggest that costs were comparable, with higher QoL for the image-based technique.

Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography may aid the diagnosis of aggressive primary prostate cancer: A case series study

Recent evidence has shown that positive results may be observed for fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in undifferentiated, biologically aggressive and metastatic tumors. The present study describes a case series of six patients with normal prostate-specific antigen (PSA) serum levels who underwent FDG-PET due to other causes. Positive PET results were observed at the prostate and the patients were subsequently diagnosed with high-risk prostate cancer. Clinical, anamnestic, laboratory and instrumental data were collected from six asymptomatic patients with total serum PSA levels of <4 ng/ml who had undergone FDG-PET due to other causes. The FDG-PET and prostate biopsy were positive for prostate cancer. All the patients were treated with radical intent. The median age was 66 years (range, 52-72 years), the median total PSA value was 2.4 ng/ml (range, 1.5-3.9 ng/ml) and the body mass index was 26.4 (range, 21.8-30.2). Three of the six patients underwent FDG-PET due to a clinical suspicion of multiple myeloma, while three patients were examined for other oncological diseases. The pathological analysis at the prostate biopsy revealed three patients with a Gleason score of 6, two with a score of 7 (4+3) and one with a score of 8 (4+4). Five of the six patients were treated by radical prostatectomy and one by radiotherapy. The pathological analysis revealed one patient of pT2a stage, three of pT2c and one of pT3b. No patients demonstrated lymph node invasion. The definitive Gleason score was 3+3 in one patient, 4+3 in one patient, 4+4 in two patients and 5+3 in one patient. Following a median follow-up time of six months (range, 1-12 months), five of the six patients underwent FDG-PET again, which revealed negative results. At the end of this study, these patients were alive without evidence of disease. By contrast, one patient demonstrated positive FDG-PET results. In conclusion, FDG-PET has been used to characterize prostate cancers in patients with apparently normal PSA levels.

Population-based analysis of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in younger men (<55 years) in Australia

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the trends in opportunistic PSA screening in Australia, focusing on younger men (<55 years of age), to examine the effects of this screening on transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsy rates and to determine the nature of prostate cancers (PCas) being detected.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

All men who received an opportunistic screening PSA test and TRUS-guided biopsy between 2001 and 2008 in Australia were analysed using data from the Australian Cancer registry (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) and Medicare databases. The Victorian cancer registry was used to obtain Gleason scores. Age-standardized and age-specific rates were calculated, along with the incidence of PCa, and correlated with Gleason scores.

RESULTS

A total 5 174 031 PSA tests detected 128 167 PCas in the period 2001-2008. During this period, PSA testing increased by 146% (a mean of 4629 tests per 100 000 men annually), with 80 and 59% increases in the rates of TRUS-guided biopsy and incidence of PCa, respectively. The highest increases in PSA screening occurred in men <55 years old and up to 1101 men had to be screened to detect one incident case of PCa (0.01%). Screening resulted in two thirds of men aged <55 years receiving a negative TRUS biopsy. There was no correlation with Gleason >7 tumours in patients aged <55 years.

CONCLUSION

Despite the ongoing controversy about the merits of PCa screening, there was an increase in PSA testing, especially in men <55 years old, leading to a modestly higher incidence of PCa in Australia. Overall, PSA screening was associated with high rates of negative TRUS-biopsy and the detection of low/intermediate grade PCa among younger patients.

Predicting utility scores for prostate cancer: mapping the Prostate Cancer Index to the Patient-Oriented Prostate Utility Scale (PORPUS)

BACKGROUND

The Prostate Cancer Index (PCI) is a health profile instrument that measures health-related quality of life with six subscales: urinary, sexual, and bowel function and bother. The Patient-Oriented Prostate Utility Scale (PORPUS-U) measures utility (0=dead and 1=full health). Utility is a preference-based approach to measure health-related quality of life, required for decision analyses and cost-effectiveness analyses. We developed a function to estimate PORPUS-U utilities from PCI scores.

METHODS

The development data set included 676 community-dwelling prostate cancer (PC) survivors who completed the PCI and PORPUS-U by mail. We fit three linear regression models: one used original PORPUS-U scores and two used log-transformed PORPUS-U scores, one with a hierarchy constraint and one without. The model selection was performed using stepwise selection and fivefold cross validation. The validation data included 248 PC outpatients with three assessments on the PCI and PORPUS-U. Scores were retransformed for validation, with Duan's smearing estimator applied to correct potential bias. The predictive ability of the models was assessed with R(2), root mean square error (RMSE) and by comparing predicted and observed utilities.

RESULTS

The best-fitting model used the log-transformed PORPUS-U with no hierarchy constraint. The R(2) was 0.72. The RMSE ranged from 0.040 to 0.061 for the three validation data sets. Differences between predicted and observed utilities ranged from 0.000 to 0.006 but predicted utilities overestimated the lowest 5% of observed PORPUS-U scores and underestimated the highest observed scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Our algorithm can calculate PORPUS-U utility scores from PCI scores, thus supplementing descriptive quality of life measures with utility scores in PC patients. Utilities derived from mapping algorithms are useful for assigning utility to groups of patients but are less accurate at predicting utility of individual patients. We are exploring statistical methods to improve the mapping of utilities from descriptive instruments.

Decision making in prostate cancer screening using decision aids vs usual care: a randomized clinical trial

IMPORTANCE

The conflicting recommendations for prostate cancer (PCa) screening and the mixed messages communicated to the public about screening effectiveness make it critical to assist men in making informed decisions.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of 2 decision aids in helping men make informed PCa screening decisions.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A racially diverse group of male outpatients aged 45 to 70 years from 3 sites were interviewed by telephone at baseline, 1 month, and 13 months, from 2007 through 2011. We conducted intention-to-treat univariate analyses and multivariable linear and logistic regression analyses, adjusting for baseline outcome measures.

INTERVENTION

Random assignment to print-based decision aid (n = 628), web-based interactive decision aid (n = 625), or usual care (UC) (n = 626).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Prostate cancer knowledge, decisional conflict, decisional satisfaction, and whether participants underwent PCa screening.

RESULTS

Of 4794 eligible men approached, 1893 were randomized. At each follow-up assessment, univariate and multivariable analyses indicated that both decision aids resulted in significantly improved PCa knowledge and reduced decisional conflict compared with UC (all P <.001). At 1 month, the standardized mean difference (Cohen’s d) in knowledge for the web group vs UC was 0.74, and in the print group vs UC, 0.73. Decisional conflict was significantly lower for web vs UC (d = 0.33) and print vs UC (d = 0.36). At 13 months, these differences were smaller but remained significant. At 1 month, high satisfaction was reported by significantly more print (60.4%) than web participants (52.2%; P = .009) and significantly more web (P = .001) and print (P = .03) than UC participants (45.5%). At 13 months, differences in the proportion reporting high satisfaction among print (55.7%) compared with UC (49.8%; P = .06) and web participants (50.4%; P = .10) were not significant. Screening rates at 13 months did not differ significantly among groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Both decision aids improved participants’ informed decision making about PCa screening up to 13 months later but did not affect actual screening rates. Dissemination of these decision aids may be a valuable public health tool.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00196807.

Projecting the yearly mortality reductions due to a cancer screening programme

The decision on whether to implement a 20-year screening programme for a cancer requires weighing the harms and costs against the health benefits (such as the number of cancer deaths averted every year). The evidence of the benefits is often based on a single-number summary, such as the mortality reduction over the entire follow-up time in a single trial, or an average of such one-number measures from a meta-analysis of several trials. There are several problems associated with using the traditional one-number summaries from trials to deduce the yearly mortality reductions expected from a sustained screening programme. We here propose using a rate ratio curve, and its complement (a mortality reduction curve), to address the mortality impact (timing, magnitude, and duration) of a screening programme. This curve is easy to interpret, as it shows when mortality reductions begin, how big they are, and how long they last. We illustrate when and how such rate ratio curves from screening trials could be computed, and how they could be used to compare reduction patterns expected with different screening regimens. We encourage trialists to report the necessary data to arrive at such projections.

Prostate-specific kallikrein-related peptidases and their relation to prostate cancer biology and detection. Established relevance and emerging roles

Kallikreins are a family of serine proteases with a range of tissue-specific and essential proteolytic functions. Among the best studied are the prostate tissue-specific KLK2 and KLK3 genes and their secreted protease products, human kallikrein 2, hk2, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Members of the so-called classic kallikreins, these highly active trypsin-like serine proteases play established roles in human reproduction. Both hK2 and PSA expression is regulated by the androgen receptor which has a fundamental role in prostate tissue development and progression of disease. This feature, combined with the ability to sensitively detect different forms of these proteins in blood and biopsies, result in a crucially important biomarker for the presence and recurrence of cancer. Emerging evidence has begun to suggest a role for these kallikreins in critical vascular events. This review discusses the established and developing biological roles of hK2 and PSA, as well as the historical and advanced use of their detection to accurately and non-invasively detect and guide treatment of prostatic disease.

Screening guidelines for non-AIDS defining cancers in HIV-infected individuals

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The growing burden of non-AIDS defining malignancies (non-ADMs) among people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) highlights the need for cancer prevention and early detection. In this article, we propose screening guidelines for non-ADMs in PLWHA.

RECENT FINDINGS

A number of recent findings may help direct cancer screening guidelines in PLWHA. Screening for lung cancer with low-dose helical chest computerized tomography (LDCT) in the National Lung Screening Trial data demonstrated a decrease in lung cancer and all-cause mortality. Recent studies have demonstrated a favorable experience among PLWHA with liver transplantation. Overdiagnosis is common with breast and prostate cancer screening. Anal cancer rates were substantially higher for HIV-infected MSM, other men and women than for HIV-uninfected individuals.

SUMMARY

Screening recommendations for the general population can be applied to PLWHA patients for breast, colon and prostate cancer. Screening for lung cancer with LDCT could be considered in PLWHA at risk. American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases screening recommendations with biennial ultrasonography may be applied to at-risk PLWHA for hepatocellular carcinoma. All HIV-infected adults should be offered anal cancer screening as part of clinical care at specialized centres.

Risk assessment to guide prostate cancer screening decisions: a cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVES

To apply the most recent evidence from randomised trials of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and explore the potential value of risk assessments to guide the use of PSA screening in practice.

DESIGN

A decision model that incorporated a Markov process was developed in 2012 to estimate the net benefit and cost of PSA screening versus no screening as a function of baseline risk.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Quality-adjusted life-2013s (QALYs) and costs.

RESULTS

The harms of screening outweighed the benefits under a number of plausible scenarios. Conclusions were sensitive to the estimated quality-of-life impacts of prostate cancer treatment as well as the incidence of cancers not detected by screening tests (poorer prognosis) and those that were detected by screening tests (better prognosis). The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of PSA screening was $168,611 per QALY for men with average risk, $73,452 per QALY for men with two times the average risk, and $22,938 [corrected] per QALY for men with five times the average risk.

CONCLUSIONS

PSA screening was not found to be cost-effective for men at an average-to-high risk of prostate cancer, but may be cost-effective for men at very high risk. Inexpensive approaches for identifying men at very high risk are needed, as is further research on the size of clinical benefit of early detection in this population. The potential for the costs of risk assessment to be offset by reduced costs of PSA screening also warrants investigation.

Divorcing diagnosis from treatment: contemporary management of low-risk prostate cancer

Today, the majority of men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer will present with low-risk features of the disease. Because prostate cancer often takes an insidious course, it is debated whether the majority of these men require radical treatment and the accompanying derangement of quality of life domains imposed by surgery, radiation, and hormonal therapy. Investigators have identified various selection criteria for "insignificant disease," or that which can be monitored for disease progression while safely delaying radical treatment. In addition to the ideal definition of low risk, a lack of randomized trials comparing the various options for treatment in this group of men poses a great challenge for urologists. Early outcomes from active surveillance cohorts support its use in carefully selected men with low-risk disease features, but frequent monitoring is required. Patient selection and disease monitoring methods will require refinement that will likely be accomplished through the increased use of biomarkers and specialized imaging techniques.

Screening for prostate cancer: an updated review

Prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed malignancy in men and its incidence has been increasing in the last decades. Diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer were radically improved after the discovery of prostatic-specific antigen. Early detection rates increased, especially in asymptomatic individuals, confirmed by recent published randomized trials. The impact of screening in overdiagnosis and overtreatments is discussed, since benefits in overall mortality rates were not clearly demonstrated. Perhaps younger patients with a longer life expectancy would be the ones with the most benefits from screening. This study presents an update of the most important screening methods for prostate cancer as well as the recent recommendations for screening.

Treatment of local-regional prostate cancer detected by PSA screening: benefits and harms according to prognostic factors

Background:

Men with screen-detected prostate cancer can choose to undergo immediate curative treatment or enter into an expectant management programme. We quantified how the benefits and harms of immediate treatment vary according to the prognostic factors of clinical T-stage, Gleason score, and patient age.

Methods:

A microsimulation model based on European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer data was used to predict the benefits and harms of immediate treatment versus delayed treatment of local–regional prostate cancer in men aged 55–74 years. Benefits included life-years gained and reduced probability of death from prostate cancer. Harms included lead time and probability of overdiagnosis.

Results:

The ratio of mean lead time to mean life-years gained ranged from 1.8 to 31.2, and the additional number of treatments required per prostate cancer death prevented ranged from 0.3 to 11.6 across the different prognostic groups. Both harm–benefit ratios were lowest, most favourable, for men aged 55–59 years and diagnosed with moderate-risk prostate cancer. Ratios were high for men aged 70–74 years regardless of clinical T-stage and Gleason score.

Conclusion:

Men aged 55–59 years with moderate-risk prostate cancer are predicted to derive greatest benefit from immediate curative treatment. Immediate treatment is least favourable for men aged 70–74 years with either low-risk or high-risk prostate cancer.

A reference set of health utilities for long-term survivors of prostate cancer: population-based data from Ontario, Canada

PURPOSE

To measure quality of life (QOL) and utilities for prostate cancer (PC) patients and determine their predictors.

METHODS

A population-based, community-dwelling, geographically diverse sample of long-term PC survivors in Ontario, Canada, was identified from the Ontario Cancer Registry and contacted through their referring physician. Consenting patients completed questionnaires by mail: Health Utilities Index (HUI 2/3), Patient Oriented Prostate Utility Scale PORPUS-U (utility), PORPUS-P (health profile), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), and Prostate Cancer Index (PCI). Clinical data were obtained from chart reviews. Regression models determined the effects of a series of variables on QOL and utility.

RESULTS

We received questionnaires and reviewed charts for 585 patients (mean age 72.6, 2-13 years postdiagnosis). Mean utility scores were as follows: PORPUS-U = 0.92, HUI2 = 0.85, and HUI3 = 0.78. Mean health profile scores were as follows: PORPUS-P = 71.7, PCI sexual, urinary, and bowel function = 23.7, 79.1, and 84.6, respectively (0 = worst, 100 = best), and FACT-P = 125.1 (0 = worst, 156 = best). In multiple regression analyses, comorbidity and PCI urinary, sexual, and bowel function were significant predictors of other QOL measures. With all variables, 32-50 % of the variance in utilities was explained.

CONCLUSIONS

Many variables affect global QOL of PC survivors; only prostate symptoms and comorbidity have independent effects. Our model allows estimation of the effects of multiple factors on utilities. These utilities for long-term outcomes of PC and its treatment are valuable for decision/cost-effectiveness models of PC treatment.

Comparative effectiveness of alternative prostate-specific antigen--based prostate cancer screening strategies: model estimates of potential benefits and harms

BACKGROUND

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recently concluded that the harms of existing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening strategies outweigh the benefits.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate comparative effectiveness of alternative PSA screening strategies.

DESIGN

Microsimulation model of prostate cancer incidence and mortality quantifying harms and lives saved for alternative PSA screening strategies.

DATA SOURCES

National and trial data on PSA growth, screening and biopsy patterns, incidence, treatment distributions, treatment efficacy, and mortality.

TARGET POPULATION

A contemporary cohort of U.S. men.

TIME HORIZON

Lifetime.

PERSPECTIVE

Societal.

INTERVENTION

35 screening strategies that vary by start and stop ages, screening intervals, and thresholds for biopsy referral.

OUTCOME MEASURES

PSA tests, false-positive test results, cancer detected, overdiagnoses, prostate cancer deaths, lives saved, and months of life saved.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

Without screening, the risk for prostate cancer death is 2.86%. A reference strategy that screens men aged 50 to 74 years annually with a PSA threshold for biopsy referral of 4 µg/L reduces the risk for prostate cancer death to 2.15%, with risk for overdiagnosis of 3.3%. A strategy that uses higher PSA thresholds for biopsy referral in older men achieves a similar risk for prostate cancer death (2.23%) but reduces the risk for overdiagnosis to 2.3%. A strategy that screens biennially with longer screening intervals for men with low PSA levels achieves similar risks for prostate cancer death (2.27%) and overdiagnosis (2.4%), but reduces total tests by 59% and false-positive results by 50%.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Varying incidence inputs or reducing the survival improvement due to screening did not change conclusions.

LIMITATION

The model is a simplification of the natural history of prostate cancer, and improvement in survival due to screening is uncertain.

CONCLUSION

Compared with standard screening, PSA screening strategies that use higher thresholds for biopsy referral for older men and that screen men with low PSA levels less frequently can reduce harms while preserving lives.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Cancer Institute and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Screening for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Any form of screening aims to reduce disease-specific and overall mortality, and to improve a person's future quality of life. Screening for prostate cancer has generated considerable debate within the medical and broader community, as demonstrated by the varying recommendations made by medical organizations and governed by national policies. To better inform individual patient decision-making and health policy decisions, we need to consider the entire body of data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on prostate cancer screening summarised in a systematic review. In 2006, our Cochrane review identified insufficient evidence to either support or refute the use of routine mass, selective, or opportunistic screening for prostate cancer. An update of the review in 2010 included three additional trials. Meta-analysis of the five studies included in the 2010 review concluded that screening did not significantly reduce prostate cancer-specific mortality. In the past two years, several updates to studies included in the 2010 review have been published thereby providing the rationale for this update of the 2010 systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether screening for prostate cancer reduces prostate cancer-specific mortality or all-cause mortality and to assess its impact on quality of life and adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

An updated search of electronic databases (PROSTATE register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CANCERLIT, and the NHS EED) was performed, in addition to handsearching of specific journals and bibliographies, in an effort to identify both published and unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All RCTs of screening versus no screening for prostate cancer were eligible for inclusion in this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The original search (2006) identified 99 potentially relevant articles that were selected for full-text review. From these citations, two RCTs were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. The search for the 2010 version of the review identified a further 106 potentially relevant articles, from which three new RCTs were included in the review. A total of 31 articles were retrieved for full-text examination based on the updated search in 2012. Updated data on three studies were included in this review. Data from the trials were independently extracted by two authors.

MAIN RESULTS

Five RCTs with a total of 341,342 participants were included in this review. All involved prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, with or without digital rectal examination (DRE), though the interval and threshold for further evaluation varied across trials. The age of participants ranged from 45 to 80 years and duration of follow-up from 7 to 20 years. Our meta-analysis of the five included studies indicated no statistically significant difference in prostate cancer-specific mortality between men randomised to the screening and control groups (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.17). The methodological quality of three of the studies was assessed as posing a high risk of bias. The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and the US Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial were assessed as posing a low risk of bias, but provided contradicting results. The ERSPC study reported a significant reduction in prostate cancer-specific mortality (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.95), whilst the PLCO study concluded no significant benefit (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.54). The ERSPC was the only study of the five included in this review that reported a significant reduction in prostate cancer-specific mortality, in a pre-specified subgroup of men aged 55 to 69 years of age. Sensitivity analysis for overall risk of bias indicated no significant difference in prostate cancer-specific mortality when referring to the meta analysis of only the ERSPC and PLCO trial data (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.30). Subgroup analyses indicated that prostate cancer-specific mortality was not affected by the age at which participants were screened. Meta-analysis of four studies investigating all-cause mortality did not determine any significant differences between men randomised to screening or control (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.03). A diagnosis of prostate cancer was significantly greater in men randomised to screening compared to those randomised to control (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.65). Localised prostate cancer was more commonly diagnosed in men randomised to screening (RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.70), whilst the proportion of men diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer was significantly lower in the screening group compared to the men serving as controls (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.87). Screening resulted in a range of harms that can be considered minor to major in severity and duration. Common minor harms from screening include bleeding, bruising and short-term anxiety. Common major harms include overdiagnosis and overtreatment, including infection, blood loss requiring transfusion, pneumonia, erectile dysfunction, and incontinence. Harms of screening included false-positive results for the PSA test and overdiagnosis (up to 50% in the ERSPC study). Adverse events associated with transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsies included infection, bleeding and pain. No deaths were attributed to any biopsy procedure. None of the studies provided detailed assessment of the effect of screening on quality of life or provided a comprehensive assessment of resource utilization associated with screening (although preliminary analyses were reported).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Prostate cancer screening did not significantly decrease prostate cancer-specific mortality in a combined meta-analysis of five RCTs. Only one study (ERSPC) reported a 21% significant reduction of prostate cancer-specific mortality in a pre-specified subgroup of men aged 55 to 69 years. Pooled data currently demonstrates no significant reduction in prostate cancer-specific and overall mortality. Harms associated with PSA-based screening and subsequent diagnostic evaluations are frequent, and moderate in severity. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment are common and are associated with treatment-related harms. Men should be informed of this and the demonstrated adverse effects when they are deciding whether or not to undertake screening for prostate cancer. Any reduction in prostate cancer-specific mortality may take up to 10 years to accrue; therefore, men who have a life expectancy less than 10 to 15 years should be informed that screening for prostate cancer is unlikely to be beneficial. No studies examined the independent role of screening by DRE.

Serum isoform [-2]proPSA derivatives significantly improve prediction of prostate cancer at initial biopsy in a total PSA range of 2-10 ng/ml: a multicentric European study

BACKGROUND

Strategies to reduce prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-driven prostate cancer (PCa) overdiagnosis and overtreatment seem to be necessary.

OBJECTIVE

To test the accuracy of serum isoform [-2]proPSA (p2PSA) and its derivatives, percentage of p2PSA to free PSA (fPSA; %p2PSA) and the Prostate Health Index (PHI)-called index tests-in discriminating between patients with and without PCa.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This was an observational, prospective cohort study of patients from five European urologic centers with a total PSA (tPSA) range of 2-10 ng/ml who were subjected to initial prostate biopsy for suspected PCa.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary end point was to evaluate the specificity, sensitivity, and diagnostic accuracy of index tests in determining the presence of PCa at prostate biopsy in comparison to tPSA, fPSA, and percentage of fPSA to tPSA (%fPSA) (standard tests) and the number of prostate biopsies that could be spared using these tests. Multivariable logistic regression models were complemented by predictive accuracy analysis and decision curve analysis.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of >646 patients, PCa was diagnosed in 264 (40.1%). Median tPSA (5.7 vs 5.8 ng/ml; p=0.942) and p2PSA (15.0 vs 14.7 pg/ml) did not differ between groups; conversely, median fPSA (0.7 vs 1 ng/ml; p<0.001), %fPSA (0.14 vs 0.17; p<0.001), %p2PSA (2.1 vs 1.6; p<0.001), and PHI (48.2 vs 38; p<0.001) did differ significantly between men with and without PCa. In multivariable logistic regression models, p2PSA, %p2PSA, and PHI significantly increased the accuracy of the base multivariable model by 6.4%, 5.6%, and 6.4%, respectively (all p<0.001). At a PHI cut-off of 27.6, a total of 100 (15.5%) biopsies could have been avoided. The main limitation is that cases were selected on the basis of their initial tPSA values.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with a tPSA range of 2-10 ng/ml, %p2PSA and PHI are the strongest predictors of PCa at initial biopsy and are significantly more accurate than tPSA and %fPSA.

The role of targeted focal therapy in the management of low-risk prostate cancer: update on current challenges

Prostate cancer is one of the most prevalent cancers among men in the United States, second only to nonmelanomatous skin cancer. Since prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing came into widespread use in the late 1980s, there has been a sharp increase in annual prostate cancer incidence. Cancer-specific mortality, though, is relatively low. The majority of these cancers will not progress to mortal disease, yet most men who are diagnosed opt for treatment as opposed to observation or active surveillance (AS). These men are thus burdened with the morbidities associated with aggressive treatments, commonly incontinence and erectile dysfunction, without receiving a mortality benefit. It is therefore necessary to both continue investigating outcomes associated with AS and to develop less invasive techniques for those who desire treatment but without the significant potential for quality-of-life side effects seen with aggressive modalities. The goals of this paper are to discuss the problems of overdiagnosis and overtreatment since the advent of PSA screening as well as the potential for targeted focal therapy (TFT) to bridge the gap between AS and definitive therapies. Furthermore, patient selection criteria for TFT, costs, side effects, and brachytherapy template-guided three-dimensional mapping biopsies (3DMB) for tumor localization will also be explored.

Risk stratification in prostate cancer screening

Screening for prostate cancer is a controversial topic within the field of urology. The US Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial did not demonstrate any difference in prostate-cancer-related mortality rates between men screened annually rather than on an 'opportunistic' basis. However, in the world's largest trial to date--the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer--screening every 2-4 years was associated with a 21% reduction in prostate-cancer-related mortality rate after 11 years. Citing the uncertain ratio between potential harm and potential benefit, the US Preventive Services Task Force recently recommended against serum PSA screening. Although this ratio has yet to be elucidated, PSA testing--and early tumour detection--is undoubtedly beneficial for some individuals. Instead of adopting a 'one size fits all' approach, physicians are likely to perform personalized risk assessment to minimize the risk of negative consequences, such as anxiety, unnecessary testing and biopsies, overdiagnosis, and overtreatment. The PSA test needs to be combined with other predictive factors or be used in a more thoughtful way to identify men at risk of symptomatic or life-threatening cancer, without overdiagnosing indolent disease. A risk-adapted approach is needed, whereby PSA testing is tailored to individual risk.

Health-related quality of life in the Finnish trial of screening for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Evidence of the potential impact of systematic screening for prostate cancer (PCa) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at a population-based level is currently scarce.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to quantify the long-term HRQoL impact associated with screening for PCa.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Postal questionnaire surveys were conducted in 1998, 2000, 2004, and 2011 among men in the Finnish PCa screening trial diagnosed with PCa (total n=7011) and among a random subsample of the trial population (n=2200). In 2011, for example, 1587 responses were received from men with PCa in the screening arm and 1706 from men in the control arm. In addition, from the trial subsample, 549 men in the screening arm and 539 in the control arm provided responses.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Health-state-value scores were compared between the intervention and control arms using three distinct HRQoL measures (15D, EQ-5D, and SF-6D), and statistical significance was assessed using t tests. In addition, differences over repeated assessments of HRQoL between groups were evaluated using generalised estimating equations.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

In the 2011 survey, a small but statistically significant difference emerged between the trial arms among men diagnosed with PCa (mean scores, screening vs control arm: 15D: 0.872 vs 0.866, p=0.14; EQ-5D: 0.852 vs 0.831, p=0.03; and SF-6D: 0.763 vs 0.756, p=0.06). Such differences in favour of the screening arm were not found among the sample of men from the trial (15D: 0.889 vs 0.892, p=0.62; EQ-5D: 0.831 vs 0.852, p=0.08; and SF-6D: 0.775 vs 0.777, p=0.88). The slight advantage with screening among men with PCa was reasonably consistent across time in the longitudinal analysis and was strongest among men with early-stage disease.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show some long-term HRQoL benefit from screening for men with PCa but suggest little impact overall in the trial population.

Clinical decisions. Screening for prostate cancer

This interactive feature addresses the diagnosis or management of a clinical case. A case vignette is followed by specific clinical options, neither of which can be considered either correct or incorrect. In short essays, experts in the field then argue for each of the options. Readers can participate in forming community opinion by choosing one of the options and, if they like, providing their reasons.