A Randomized Trial of Risk‐Adapted Screening for Prostate Cancer in Young Men ‐ Results of the First Screening Round of the PROBASE Trial

[Prostate cancer screening? Only evidence-based, risk-adjusted, and organized!]

In view of a recent recommendation of the European Commission to conceptualize novel screening approaches for lung, gastric, and prostate cancer, Germany is also invoked to revise its prostate early detection program. This discussion article provides an overview of new findings on prostate cancer screening, which suggest an organized and risk-adapted screening approach. Based on the German risk-adapted screening trial PROBASE, together with recently published data on organized screening programs in Europe, model projects should be established to determine the specific modalities for a new organized and risk-adapted prostate cancer screening program.

Prostate Cancer Early Detection in the European Union and UK

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

While prostate cancer (PCa) incidence and mortality rates continue to rise, early detection of PCa remains highly controversial, and the research landscape is rapidly evolving. Existing systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) provide valuable insights, but often focus on single aspects of early detection, hindering a comprehensive understanding of the topic. We aim to fill this gap by providing a comprehensive SR of contemporary SRs covering different aspects of early detection of PCa in the European Union (EU) and the UK.

METHODS

On June 1, 2023, we searched four databases (Medline ALL via Ovid, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and Google Scholar. To avoid repetition of previous studies, only SRs (qualitative, quantitative, and/or MAs) were considered eligible. In the data, common themes were identified to present the evidence systematically.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

We identified 1358 citations, resulting in 26 SRs eligible for inclusion. Six themes were identified: (1) invitation: men at general risk should be invited at >50 yr of age, and testing should be discontinued at >70 yr or with <10 yr of life expectancy; (2) decision-making: most health authorities discourage population-based screening and instead recommend a shared decision-making (SDM) approach, but implementation of SDM in clinical practice varies widely; decision aids help men make more informed and value-consistent screening decisions and decrease men's intention to attempt screening, but these do not affect screening uptake; (3) acceptance: facilitators for men considering screening include social prompting by partners and clinician recommendations, while barriers include a lack of knowledge, low-risk perception, and masculinity attributes; (4) screening test and algorithm: prostate-specific antigen-based screening reduces PCa-specific mortality and metastatic disease in men aged 55-69 yr at randomisation if screened at least twice; (5) harms and benefits: these benefits come at the cost of unnecessary biopsies, overdiagnosis, and subsequent overtreatment; and (6) future of screening: risk-adapted screening including (prebiopsy) risk calculators, magnetic resonance imaging, and blood- and urine-based biomarkers could reduce these harms. To enable a comprehensive overview, we focused on SRs. These do not include the most recent prospective studies, which were therefore incorporated in the discussion.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

By identifying consistent and conflicting evidence, this review highlights the evidence-based foundations that can be built upon, as well as areas requiring further research and improvement to reduce the burden of PCa in the EU and UK.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This review of 26 reviews covers various aspects of prostate cancer screening such as invitation, decision-making, screening tests, harms, and benefits. This review provides insights into existing evidence, highlighting the areas of consensus and discrepancies, to guide future research and improve prostate cancer screening strategies in Europe.

Preliminary effects of risk-adapted PSA screening for prostate cancer after integrating PRS-specific and age-specific variation

Background

Although the risk of prostate cancer (PCa) varies across different ages and genetic risks, it's unclear about the effects of genetic-specific and age-specific prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for PCa.

Methods

Weighed and unweighted polygenic risk scores (PRS) were constructed to classify the participants from the PLCO trial into low- or high-PRS groups. The age-specific and PRS-specific cut-off values of PSA for PCa screening were determined with time-dependent receiver-operating-characteristic curves and area-under-curves (tdAUCs). Improved screening strategies integrating PRS-specific and age-specific cut-off values of PSA were compared to traditional PSA screening on accuracy, detection rates of high-grade PCa (Gleason score ≥7), and false positive rate.

Results

Weighted PRS with 80 SNPs significantly associated with PCa was determined as the optimal PRS, with an AUC of 0.631. After stratifying by PRS, the tdAUCs of PSA with a 10-year risk of PCa were 0.818 and 0.816 for low- and high-PRS groups, whereas the cut-off values were 1.42 and 1.62 ng/mL, respectively. After further stratifying by age, the age-specific cut-off values of PSA were relatively lower for low PRS (1.42, 1.65, 1.60, and 2.24 ng/mL for aged <60, 60-64, 65-69, and ≥70 years) than high PRS (1.48, 1.47, 1.89, and 2.72 ng/mL). Further analyses showed an obvious interaction of positive PSA and high PRS on PCa incidence and mortality. Very small difference in PCa risk were observed among subgroups with PSA (-) across different age and PRS, and PCa incidence and mortality with PSA (+) significantly increased as age and PRS, with highest risk for high-PRS/PSA (+) in participants aged ≥70 years [HRs (95%CI): 16.00 (12.62-20.29) and 19.48 (9.26-40.96)]. The recommended screening strategy reduced 12.8% of missed PCa, ensured high specificity, but not caused excessive false positives than traditional PSA screening.

Conclusion

Risk-adapted screening integrating PRS-specific and age-specific cut-off values of PSA would be more effective than traditional PSA screening.

Prostate Cancer Screening in Young Men

Background: Prostate cancer (PCa) screening strategies are being developed and evaluated in several countries. However, most of the evidence regarding PCa screening has been generated in study populations aged 50 and older. Aims: This study summarizes findings of a screening trial in younger men and discuss those findings in the context of other screening trials. Methods: Non-systematic review. Results: Screening of 45-year-old men resulted in a low PCa detection rate. Nonetheless, almost 70% of screen-detected PCa at this age was clinically significant. In young men ISUP GG 1 screen-detected cancers warrant rigorous follow-up. A baseline, midlife prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value at age 45 may safely exclude the vast majority of men from further screening investigations for at least 5 years. At age 45, a confirmatory PSA value reduces the number of subsequent tests almost by half. Sequential magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a reflex test subsequent to an elevated PSA ≥ 3 ng/mL needs further investigation in young men. Conclusions: Screening in young men needs to be carefully investigated in order to avoid overscreening and overdiagnosis.

Understanding the Barriers to Prostate Cancer Population-Based Early Detection Programs: The PRAISE-U BEST Survey

In 2022, the European Commission updated its recommendation on cancer screening, inviting the Member States (MSs) to explore the feasibility of stepwise implementation of population-based screening for prostate cancer (PCa). In line with this recommendation, the PRAISE-U (Prostate Cancer Awareness and Initiative for Screening in the European Union (EU)) project was initiated. As part of the PRAISE-U, we aim to understand the current practice towards early detection in the EU MSs, the barriers to implementing or planning population-based screening programmes, and potential solutions to overcome these barriers.

METHODS

We adapted the Barriers to Effective Screening Tool (BEST) survey to the PCa context. However, it has not been validated in this context. We translated it into all spoken languages in the EU27 and disseminated it to different stakeholders across the EU using a snowballing approach.

RESULTS

We received 410 responses from 55 countries, of which 301 (73%) were from the 27 EU MSs. The most represented stakeholder group was urologists (218 (54%)), followed by general practitioners (GPs) (83 (21%)), patient representatives (35 (9%)), policy stakeholders (27 (7%)), researchers (23 (6%)), oncologists, pathologists, radiologists, nurses, and others (16 (4%)) and one industry representative. Among all respondents, 286 (69%) reported the absence of a population-based screening programme, mainly attributed to resource limitations and a lack of political and medical society support. Out of these 286 respondents, 196 (69%) indicated that opportunistic screening is being applied in their country, and 199 (70%) expressed their support for population-based screening programmes (which was highest amongst patient representatives and urologists and lowest amongst GPs and policy stakeholders). The highest scored barriers were lack of political support, insufficient operational resources, and inadequate participation. Suggested solutions to overcome these included awareness campaigns, consensus meetings, political lobbying and European guidelines (to overcome political support barriers), compatible IT systems (to overcome operational barriers), and easy access (to overcome participation barriers).

CONCLUSIONS

Participants have noted the presence of opportunistic screening, and particularly urologists and patient representatives expressed their support for the establishment of a population-based PCa screening programme. Nevertheless, successful implementation of population-based screening programmes is complex; it requires political and medical society support, operational resources and capacity, awareness campaigns, as well as the development of protocols, guidelines, and legal frameworks.

Evolution of European prostate cancer screening protocols and summary of ongoing trials

Population-based organised repeated screening for prostate cancer has been found to reduce disease-specific mortality, but with substantial overdiagnosis leading to overtreatment. Although only very few countries have implemented a screening programme on a national level, individual prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing is common. This opportunistic testing may have little favourable impact, while stressing the side-effects. The classic early detection protocols as were state-of-the-art in the 1990s applied a PSA and digital rectal examination threshold for sextant systematic prostate biopsy, with a fixed interval for re-testing, and limited indication for expectant management. In the three decades since these trials were started, different important improvements have become available in the cascade of screening, indication for biopsy, and treatment. The main developed aspects include: better identification of individuals at risk (using early/baseline PSA, family history, and/or genetic profile), individualised re-testing interval, optimised and individualised starting and stopping age, with gradual invitation at a fixed age rather than invitation of a wider range of age groups, risk stratification for biopsy (using PSA density, risk calculator, magnetic resonance imaging, serum and urine biomarkers, or combinations/sequences), targeted biopsy, transperineal biopsy approach, active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer, and improved staging of disease. All these developments are suggested to decrease the side-effects of screening, while at least maintaining the advantages, but Level 1 evidence is lacking. The knowledge gained and new developments on early detection are being tested in different prospective screening trials throughout Europe. In addition, the European Union-funded PRostate cancer Awareness and Initiative for Screening in the European Union (PRAISE-U) project will compare and evaluate different screening pilots throughout Europe. Implementation and sustainability will also be addressed. Modern screening approaches may reduce the burden of the second most frequent cause of cancer-related death in European males, while minimising side-effects. Also, less efficacious opportunistic early detection may be indirectly reduced.

Men's Acceptance of Screening for Prostate Cancer with Prostate-specific Antigen, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Prostate Biopsy

BACKGROUND

A prerequisite before introducing a screening program is that the screening examinations are acceptable to participants.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the acceptance and bother of prostate cancer screening examinations.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The randomized population-based GÖTEBORG-2 prostate cancer screening trial invited >37 000 men for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing followed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in case of elevated PSA and prostate biopsy (targeted and/or systematic) if indicated.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Participants were asked to fill out a questionnaire and rate the level of bother associated with each examination (PSA, MRI, and prostate biopsy) on a categorical scale ranging from 1 to 5 (1 = "not at all bothersome" and 5 = "very bothersome"), and to rate their willingness to repeat the examinations, by marking an X on a continuous scale ranging from 0 to 10 (0 = "yes, without any hesitation" and 10 = "no, absolutely not"). Wilcoxon signed rank test was used.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Compliance with MRI was 96% (1790/1872), compliance with biopsy was 89% (810/907), and the response rate to the questionnaire was 75% (608/810). Men who underwent all examinations (n = 577) responded that biopsy was more bothersome than PSA test (p < 0.001) and MRI (p < 0.001). High levels of bother (≥4 out of 5) were reported by 2% (12/577) for PSA test, 8% (46/577) for MRI, and 43% (247/577) for biopsy. Men were more willing to repeat MRI than biopsy (p < 0.001), but the difference was small (median 0.2 [interquartile range 0.1-0.6] vs 0.5 [0.1-2.0]).

CONCLUSIONS

Biopsies are more bothersome than MRI, but a large majority of men accept to repeat both examinations if necessary. Omitting biopsy for MRI-negative men and shifting to targeted biopsies only will reduce bother for men participating in prostate cancer screening.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We asked men how bothersome they found the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and prostate biopsies. Biopsies were more bothersome than PSA and MRI, but most men were willing to repeat all procedures if necessary.

[Prostate cancer screening-current overview]

BACKGROUND

The harm-to-benefit ratio of prostate cancer (PCa) screening remains controversial mainly due to the unfavorable test characteristics of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a screening test.

METHODS

In this nonsystematic review, we present a current overview of the body of evidence on prostate cancer screening with a focus on the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate.

RESULTS

Evidence generated in large randomized controlled trials showed that PSA-based screening significantly decreases cancer-specific mortality. The main obstacle in developing and implementing PCa screening strategies is the resulting overdiagnosis and as a consequence overtreatment of indolent cancers. Opportunistic screening is characterized by an adverse benefit-to-harm ratio and should, therefore, not be recommended. The German Statutory Early Detection Program for prostate cancer, which consists of a digital rectal examination (DRE) as a stand-alone screening test, is not evidence-based, neither specific nor sensitive enough and results in unnecessary diagnostics. The European Commission recently urged member states to develop population-based and organized risk-adapted PSA-based screening programs, which are currently tested in the ongoing German PROBASE trial. Finetuning of the diagnostic pathway following PSA-testing seems key to improve its positive and negative predictive value and thereby making PCa screening more accurate. Incorporation of prostatic MRI into screening strategies leads to more accurate diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer, while diagnosis of indolent cancers is reduced. In the future, molecular liquid-based biomarkers have the potential to complement or even replace PSA in PCa screening and further personalize screening strategies. Active surveillance as an alternative to immediate radical therapy of demographically increasing PCa diagnoses can potentially further improve the benefit-to-harm ratio of organized screening.

CONCLUSION

Early detection of PCa should be organized on a population level into personalized and evidence-based screening strategies. Multiparametric MRI of the prostate may play a key role in this setting.

Unveiling hormone-stimulated gene mechanisms in prostate cancer: A prognostic model, immune infiltration analysis, and drug sensitivity study

Hormones promote the progression of prostate cancer (PRCA) through the activation of a complex regulatory network. Inhibition of hormones or modulation of specific network nodes alone is insufficient to suppress the entire oncogenic network. Therefore, it is imperative to elucidate the mechanisms underlying the occurrence and development of PRCA in order to identify reliable diagnostic markers and therapeutic targets. To this end, we used publicly available data to analyze the potential mechanisms of hormone-stimulated genes in PRCA, construct a prognostic model, and assess immune infiltration and drug sensitivity. The single-cell RNA-sequencing data of PRCA were subjected to dimensionality reduction clustering and annotation, and the cells were categorized into two groups based on hormone stimulus-related scores. The differentially expressed genes between the two groups were screened and incorporated into the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator machine learning algorithm, and a prognostic model comprising six genes (ZNF862, YIF1A, USP22, TAF7, SRSF3, and SPARC) was constructed. The robustness of the model was validation through multiple methods. Immune infiltration scores in the two risk groups were calculated using three different algorithms. In addition, the relationship between the model genes and immune cell infiltration, and that between risk score and immune cell infiltration were analyzed. Drug sensitivity analysis was performed for the model genes and risk score using public databases to identify potential candidate drugs. Our findings provide novel insights into the mechanisms of hormone-stimulated genes in PRCA progression, prognosis, and drug screening.

Prostate Cancer Foundation Screening Guidelines for Black Men in the United States

BACKGROUND

In the United States, Black men are at highest risk for being diagnosed with and dying from prostate cancer. Given this disparity, we examined relevant data to establish clinical prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening guidelines for Black men in the United States.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search identified 1848 unique publications for screening. Of those screened, 287 studies were selected for full-text review, and 264 were considered relevant and form the basis for these guidelines. The numbers were reported according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials provided Level 1 evidence that regular PSA screening of men 50 to 74 years of age of average risk reduced metastasis and prostate cancer death at 16 to 22 years of follow-up. The best available evidence specifically for Black men comes from observational and modeling studies that consider age to obtain a baseline PSA, frequency of testing, and age when screening should end. Cohort studies suggest that discussions about baseline PSA testing between Black men and their clinicians should begin in the early 40s, and data from modeling studies indicate prostate cancer develops 3 to 9 years earlier in Black men compared with non-Black men. Lowering the age for baseline PSA testing to 40 to 45 years of age from 50 to 55 years of age, followed by regular screening until 70 years of age (informed by PSA values and health factors), could reduce prostate cancer mortality in Black men (approximately 30% relative risk reduction) without substantially increasing overdiagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines recommend that Black men should obtain information about PSA screening for prostate cancer. Among Black men who elect screening, baseline PSA testing should occur between ages 40 and 45. Depending on PSA value and health status, annual screening should be strongly considered. (Supported by the Prostate Cancer Foundation.).

Normalised repeat serum prostate-specific antigen: associations with age and magnetic resonance imaging results

OBJECTIVE

To assess the value of a repeat prostate-specific antigen measurement (PSA2) before magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in men with a raised PSA (PSA1) <10 µg/L.

METHOD

Medical records of men aged < 75 years referred in 2021 for PSA1 3.0-9.9 µg/L (< 70 years) or 5.0-9.9 µg/L (70-74 years) were reviewed. PSA2 was sampled before MRI within 60 days from PSA1. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated with logistic regression. Chi-square and trend-test were used for categorical variables.

RESULTS

A total of 341 men were included. Median time between PSA1 and PSA2 was 28 days (interquartile range 20-35 days). PSA normalised in 16% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 13-21). Younger men were more likely to have a normal PSA2 (OR: 0.95 per year older, 95% CI: 0.92-0.99). Among men aged < 70 years, those with PSA1 < 5 µg/L were more likely to have normalised PSA2 than those with PSA1 ≥ 5 µg/L (21% vs. 10%, p = 0.01). A greater proportion of men with normalised PSA2 had a Prostate Imaging Data and Reporting System MRI score of 1-3 than men with non-normalised PSA2 (93% vs. 77%, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

A clinically significant proportion of men with a moderately raised PSA value have a normal PSA2. Younger men and men with lower PSA1 were more likely to have a normal PSA2. Few men with normalised PSA2 had suspicious MRI findings. Routine repeat PSA-testing may be motivated in men with a moderately raised PSA value to save MRI resources, particularly in younger men.

Population-based Organised Prostate Cancer Testing: Results from the First Invitation of 50-year-old Men

BACKGROUND

The European Union recently recommended evaluation of the feasibility of organised prostate cancer screening. In Sweden, regional population-based organised prostate cancer testing (OPT) programmes were introduced in 2020.

OBJECTIVE

To describe initial participation rates and diagnostic outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The three most populated Swedish regions invited all men aged 50 yr to OPT by a letter in 2020-2022. Men with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥3 ng/ml were referred for prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). PSA assays differed across regions. Men with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 1-3 and PSA density ≥0.15 ng/ml/cm3 or PI-RADS 4-5 were referred for a biopsy. Data were obtained from the Swedish Register for Organised Prostate Cancer Testing.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Overall and regional participation rates, PSA distributions, PI-RADS score distributions, cancer detection, and treatment were evaluated.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 23 855 (35%) of 68 060 invited men participated; 696 (2.9%) had PSA ≥3 ng/ml, and of them, 306 (44%) had a biopsy indication and 221 (32%) had a biopsy. On biopsy, 93 (42%) had Gleason grade group ≥2 (0.39% of PSA-tested men) and 44 (20%) Gleason grade group 1 cancer. Most men with cancer had treatment with curative intent (70%) or were under active surveillance (28%). Across regions, proportions of men with PSA ≥3 ng/ml ranged from 2.3% to 4.0%, and those with PI-RADS score 4-5 ranged from 12% to 21%. A limitation is that results are applicable only to first testing of men in their early 50s.

CONCLUSIONS

The OPT programmes are feasible with good compliance to the diagnostic pathway. The use of MRI and PSA density avoided a biopsy for over half of the men with PSA ≥3 ng/ml. Inter-regional differences in diagnostic outcomes show a need for standardisation of the diagnostic pathway's components.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We report the diagnostic outcomes of inviting 68 000 50-yr-old men to organised prostate cancer testing.

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Screening at the Age of 45 Years: Results from the First Screening Round of the PROBASE Trial

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been suggested as a tool for guiding biopsy recommendations in prostate cancer (PC) screening.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the performance of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) in young men at age 45 yr who participated in a PC screening trial (PROBASE) on the basis of baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Participants with confirmed PSA ≥3 ng/ml were offered mpMRI followed by MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy (FBx) with targeted and systematic cores. mpMRI scans from the first screening round for men randomised to an immediate PSA test in PROBASE were evaluated by local readers and then by two reference radiologists (experience >10 000 prostate MRI examinations) blinded to the histopathology. The PROBASE trial is registered as ISRCTN37591328 OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The local and reference Prostate Imaging-Data and Reporting System (PI-RADS) scores were compared, and the sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated for both readings for different cutoffs (PI-RADS 3 vs 4).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of 186 participants, 114 underwent mpMRI and FBx. PC was detected in 47 (41%), of whom 33 (29%) had clinically significant PC (csPC; International Society of Urological Pathology grade group ≥2). Interobserver reliability between local and reference PI-RADS scores was moderate (k = 0.41). At a cutoff of PI-RADS 4, reference reading showed better performance for csPC detection (sensitivity 79%, NPV 91%, accuracy of 85%) than local reading (sensitivity 55%, NPV 80%, accuracy 68%). Reference reading did not miss any PC cases for a cutoff of PI-RADS <3. If PI-RADS ≥4 were to be used as a biopsy cutoff, mpMRI would reduce negative biopsies by 68% and avoid detection of nonsignificant PC in 71% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate MRI in a young screening population is difficult to read. The MRI accuracy of for csPC detection is highly dependent on reader experience, and double reading might be advisable. More data are needed before MRI is included in PC screening for men at age 45 yr.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Measurement of prostate specific antigen (PSA) is an effective screening test for early detection of prostate cancer (PC) and can reduce PC-specific deaths, but it can also lead to unnecessary biopsies and treatment. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after a positive PSA test has been proposed as a way to reduce the number of biopsies, with biopsy only recommended for men with suspicious MRI findings. Our results indicate that MRI accuracy is moderate for men aged 45 years but can be increased by a second reading of the images by expert radiologists. For broad application of MRI in routine screening, double reading may be advisable.

The Short- and Long-Term Anticipation of Prostate Cancer Incidence in Korea: Based on Social Aging Trends and Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing Rate during the Last Decade

The current incidence of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, which plays a crucial role in detecting prostate cancer (PCa) in an aged population, is low in Korea. Reflecting these epidemiologic characteristics, we estimated the short- and long-term incidences of PCa. A regression equation model was extracted based on two critical pieces of information: (1) the distribution of newly detected PCa cases in each age group of the 50s, 60s, 70s, and over 80s from a recent period (2006-2020), and (2) the PSA testing rate (PSAr) from the previous decade (2006-2016) for each age subgroup. The incidence increased fourfold (4533 in 2006 to 16,815 in 2020), with each age subgroup accounting for 7.9% (50s), 31.4% (60s), 43.0% (70s), and 17.1% (over 80s) of cases in 2020. PSAr increased by an average of 1.08% annually. If these trends are maintained, 28,822 new cases will be diagnosed in 2030 (expected PSAr: 14.4%) and 40,478 cases in 2040 (expected PSAr: 26.4%). If a public PSA screening were implemented for men only in their 60s (assuming a PSAr of 60% in the 60s) and 70s (assuming a PSAr of 80% in the 70s) in 2030, 37,503 cases in 2030 (expected PSAr: 23.1%) and 43,719 cases in 2040 (expected PSAr: 29.9%) would be estimated. According to the projection, the incidence of PCa will increase twofold by 2034 compared to 2020. If national screening were only conducted in the 60s and 70s, a higher detection of almost threefold would be expected by 2040.

Prostate cancer screening in African American men: a review of the evidence

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is the most diagnosed cancer in African American men, yet prostate cancer screening regimens in this group are poorly guided by existing evidence, given underrepresentation of African American men in prostate cancer screening trials. It is critical to optimize prostate cancer screening and early detection in this high-risk group because underdiagnosis may lead to later-stage cancers at diagnosis and higher mortality while overdiagnosis may lead to unnecessary treatment.

METHODS

We performed a review of the literature related to prostate cancer screening and early detection specific to African American men to summarize the existing evidence available to guide health-care practice.

RESULTS

Limited evidence from observational and modeling studies suggests that African American men should be screened for prostate cancer. Consideration should be given to initiating screening of African American men at younger ages (eg, 45-50 years) and at more frequent intervals relative to other racial groups in the United States. Screening intervals can be optimized by using a baseline prostate-specific antigen measurement in midlife. Finally, no evidence has indicated that African American men would benefit from screening beyond 75 years of age; in fact, this group may experience higher rates of overdiagnosis at older ages.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base for prostate cancer screening in African American men is limited by the lack of large, randomized studies. Our literature search supported the need for African American men to be screened for prostate cancer, for initiating screening at younger ages (45-50 years), and perhaps screening at more frequent intervals relative to men of other racial groups in the United States.

Application and optimization of prostate-specific antigen screening strategy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review

Currently, prostate cancer (PCa) poses a global risk to the well-being of males. Over the past few years, the utilization of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening has become prevalent in the identification and management of PCa, which has promoted a large number of patients with advanced PCa to receive timely treatment and reduce the mortality. Nevertheless, the utilization of PSA in PCa screening has sparked debate, and certain research has validated the potential for overdiagnosis and overtreatment associated with PSA screening. Hence, in order to decrease the mortality rate of PCa patients and prevent unnecessary diagnosis and treatment, it is crucial to carefully choose the suitable population and strategy for PSA screening in PCa. In this systematic review, the clinical studies on PSA screening for the diagnosis and treatment of PCa were thoroughly examined. The review also delved into the effects and mechanisms of PSA screening on the prognosis of PCa patients, examined the factors contributing to overdiagnosis and overtreatment, and put forth strategies for optimization. The objective of this research is to offer valuable recommendations regarding the utilization of PSA screening for the detection and management of PCa.

Digital Rectal Examination Is Not a Useful Screening Test for Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Annual digital rectal examination (DRE) is recommended as a stand-alone screening test for prostate cancer (PCa) in Germany for 45+ yr olds. DRE diagnostic performance in men as young as 45 yr old has not been proved by a screening trial.

OBJECTIVE

To determine DRE diagnostic performance in a screening trial.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This analysis was conducted within the multicentric, randomized PROBASE trial, which enrolled >46 000 men at age 45 to test risk-adapted prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for PCa.

INTERVENTION

(1) DRE was analyzed as a one-time, stand-alone screening offer at age 45 in 6537 men in one arm of the trial and (2) PCa detection by DRE was evaluated at the time of PSA-screen-driven biopsies (N = 578).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

(1) True-/false-positive detection rates of DRE as compared with PSA screening and (2) DRE outcome at the time of a prostate biopsy were evaluated.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

(1) A prospective analysis of 57 men with suspicious DRE at age 45 revealed three PCa. Detection rate by DRE was 0.05% (three of 6537) as compared with a four-fold higher rate by PSA screening (48 of 23 301, 0.21%). The true-positive detection rate by DRE relative to screening by PSA was 0.22 (95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.07-0.72]) and the false-positive detection rate by DRE was 2.2 (95% CI = [1.50-3.17]). (2) Among PSA-screen-detected PCa cases, 86% had unsuspicious DRE (sensitivity relative to PSA was 14%), with the majority of these tumors (86%) located in the potentially accessible zones of the prostate as seen by magnetic resonance imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

The performance of stand-alone DRE to screen for PCa is poor. DRE should not be recommended as a PCa screening test in young men. Furthermore, DRE does not improve the detection of PSA-screen-detected PCa.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Our report demonstrated the poor diagnostic performance of digital rectal examination in the screening for prostate cancer in young men.

Relationship Between Baseline Prostate-specific Antigen on Cancer Detection and Prostate Cancer Death: Long-term Follow-up from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

The European Association of Urology guidelines recommend a risk-based strategy for prostate cancer screening based on the first prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and age.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the impact of the first PSA level on prostate cancer (PCa) detection and PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) in a population-based screening trial (repeat screening every 2-4 yr).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We evaluated 25589 men aged 55-59 yr, 16898 men aged 60-64 yr, and 12936 men aged 65-69 yr who attended at least one screening visit in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial (screening arm: repeat PSA testing every 2-4 yr and biopsy in cases with elevated PSA; control arm: no active screening offered) during 16-yr follow-up (FU).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

We assessed the actuarial probability for any PCa and for clinically significant (cs)PCa (Gleason ≥7). Cox proportional-hazards regression was performed to assess whether the association between baseline PSA and PCSM was comparable for all age groups. A Lorenz curve was computed to assess the association between baseline PSA and PCSM for men aged 60-61 yr.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The overall actuarial probability at 16 yr ranged from 12% to 16% for any PCa and from 3.7% to 5.7% for csPCa across the age groups. The actuarial probability of csPCa at 16 yr ranged from 1.2-1.5% for men with PSA <1.0 ng/ml to 13.3-13.8% for men with PSA ≥3.0 ng/ml. The association between baseline PSA and PCSM differed marginally among the three age groups. A Lorenz curve for men aged 60-61 yr showed that 92% of lethal PCa cases occurred among those with PSA above the median (1.21 ng/ml). In addition, for men initially screened at age 60-61 yr with baseline PSA <2 ng/ml, further continuation of screening is unlikely to be beneficial after the age of 68-70 yr if PSA is still <2 ng/ml. No case of PCSM emerged in the subsequent 8 yr (up to age 76-78 yr). A limitation is that these results may not be generalizable to an opportunistic screening setting or to contemporary clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

In all age groups, baseline PSA can guide decisions on the repeat screening interval. Baseline PSA of <1.0 ng/ml for men aged 55-69 yr is a strong indicator to delay or stop further screening.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In prostate cancer screening, the patient's baseline PSA (prostate-specific antigen) level can be used to guide decisions on when to repeat screening. The PSA test when used according to current knowledge is valuable in helping to reduce the burden of prostate cancer.

A urine extracellular vesicle lncRNA classifier for high-grade prostate cancer and increased risk of progression: A multi-center study

To construct a urine extracellular vesicle long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) classifier that can detect high-grade prostate cancer (PCa) of grade group 2 or greater and estimate the risk of progression during active surveillance, we identify high-grade PCa-specific lncRNAs by combined analyses of cohorts from TAHSY, TCGA, and the GEO database. We develop and validate a 3-lncRNA diagnostic model (Clnc, being made of AC015987.1, CTD-2589M5.4, RP11-363E6.3) that can detect high-grade PCa. Clnc shows higher accuracy than prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3), multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), and two risk calculators (Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial [PCPT]-RC 2.0 and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer [ERSPC]-RC) in the training cohort (n = 350), two independent cohorts (n = 232; n = 251), and TCGA cohort (n = 499). In the prospective active surveillance cohort (n = 182), Clnc at diagnosis remains a powerful independent predictor for overall active surveillance progression. Thus, Clnc is a potential biomarker for high-grade PCa and can also serve as a biomarker for improved selection of candidates for active surveillance.

Risk-stratified multi-round PSA screening for prostate cancer integrating the screening reference level and subgroup-specific progression indicators

BACKGROUND

Although prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is widely used in prostate cancer (PCa) screening, nearly half of PCa cases are missed and less than one-third of cases are non-lethal. Adopting diagnostic criteria in population-based screening and ignoring PSA progression are presumed leading causes.

METHODS

A total of 31,942 participants with multi-round PSA tests from the PLCO trial were included. Time-dependent receiver-operating-characteristic curves and area under curves (tdAUCs) were performed to determine the screening reference level and the optimal subgroup-specific progression indicator. Effects of risk-stratified multi-round PSA screening were evaluated with multivariable Cox regression and measured with hazard ratio [HR (95%CIs)].

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 11.6 years, a total of 3484 PCa cases and 216 PCa deaths were documented. The tdAUC of 10-year incidence PCa with PSA was 0.816, and the cut-off value was 1.61 ng/ml. Compared to subgroup with stable negative PSA in both first-round (FR) and last-round (LR) tests [FR(-)/LR(-)], HRs (95%CI) of PCa incidence were 1.66 (1.20-2.29), 8.29 (7.25-9.48), and 14.52 (12.95-16.28) for subgroups with loss of positive PSA[FR(+)/LR(-)], gain of positive PSA[FR(-)/LR(+)], and stable positive PSA[FR(+)/LR(+)]; while HRs(95%CI) of PCa mortality were 1.47 (0.52-4.15), 5.71 (3.68-8.86), and 5.01 (3.41-7.37). After excluding regressive PSA [(namely FR(+)/LR(-)], absolute velocity was the shared optimal progression indicator for subgroups with FR(-)/LR(-), FR(-)/LR(+), and FR(+)/LR(+), with tdAUCs of 0.665, 0.681 and 0.741, and cut-off values of 0.07, 0.21, and 0.33 ng/ml/year. After reclassifying participants into groups with positive and negative progression based on subgroup-specific progression indicators, incidence HR (95%CI) were 2.41 (1.87-3.10), 2.91 (2.43-3.48), and 3.16 (2.88-3.46) for positive progression compared to negative progression within subgroups of FR(-)/LR(-), FR(-)/LR(+), and FR(+)/LR(+), while mortality HR (95%CI) were 2.22 (0.91-5.38), 2.37 (1.28-4.38), and 2.98 (1.94-4.59). To improve screening performances by excluding regressive PSA and low-risk positive progression in FR(-)/LR(-), optimized screening strategy not only significantly reduce 32.4% of missed PCa (54.0% [1881/3484] vs. 21.6% [754/3484], P < 0.001), but also detected additional 8.0% of high-grade PCa (Gleason score 7-10: 36.0% [665/1849] vs. 28.0% [206/736], P < 0.001) than traditional screening strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk-stratified multi-round PSA screening strategy integrating the screening reference level and the optimal subgroup-specific progression indicator of PSA could be recommended as a fundamental strategy to reduce missed diagnosis and improve the detection of high-grade PCa cases.

[Systematic or targeted fusion-guided biopsy]

BACKGROUND

Early detection of prostate cancer (PCa) is associated with a high risk for detecting low-risk disease. In the primary biopsy indication, systematic biopsy leads to an increased detection of clinically insignificant PCa, and significant prostate cancers are not detected with sufficient sensitivity, especially without prior magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Similar data have recently become available for PCa screening.

OBJECTIVES

In light of the current literature, this article aims to discuss the data on systematic and combined targeted and systematic multiparametric MRI (mpMRI)-guided fusion biopsy to improve PCa diagnosis in clinically suspected cancer even in screening using multivariable risk stratification.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature review on mpMRI and MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy (TRUS: transrectal ultrasonography) for tumor detection in suspected prostate cancer and PCa screening was performed.

RESULTS

Multiparametric MRI as a reflex test after prostate-specific antigen (PSA) determination (PSA cut-off 4 ng/ml) in combination with targeted biopsy alone reduces the detection of clinically nonsignificant tumors in early detection by half. On the other hand, in the form of a target saturation or in combination with a systematic biopsy, the sensitivity for the detection of cancers of International Society of Urogenital Pathology (ISUP) grade groups 2 or higher can be improved. Similar results are also shown in PCa screening with a PSA cut-off of 3 ng/ml.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for performing a targeted fusion biopsy alone is currently insufficient. Therefore, the combination of mpMRI-guided targeted and systematic biopsy continues to be the recommended standard for prostate cancer diagnosis.

Adherence to a risk-adapted screening strategy for prostate cancer: First results of the PROBASE trial

PROBASE is a population-based, randomized trial of 46 495 German men recruited at age 45 to compare effects of risk-adapted prostate cancer (PCa) screening starting either immediately at age 45, or at a deferred age of 50 years. Based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, men are classified into risk groups with different screening intervals: low-risk (<1.5 ng/ml, 5-yearly screening), intermediate-risk (1.5-2.99 ng/ml, 2 yearly), and high risk (>3 ng/ml, recommendation for immediate biopsy). Over the first 6 years of study participation, attendance rates to scheduled screening visits varied from 70.5% to 79.4%, depending on the study arm and risk group allocation, in addition 11.2% to 25.4% of men reported self-initiated PSA tests outside the PROBASE protocol. 38.5% of participants had a history of digital rectal examination or PSA testing prior to recruitment to PROBASE, frequently associated with family history of PCa. These men showed higher rates (33% to 57%, depending on subgroups) of self-initiated PSA testing in-between PROBASE screening rounds. In the high-risk groups (both arms), the biopsy acceptance rate was 64% overall, but was higher among men with screening PSA ≥4 ng/ml (>71%) and with PIRADS ≥3 findings upon multiparameter magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) (>72%), compared with men with PSA ≥3 to 4 ng/ml (57%) or PIRADS score ≤ 2 (59%). Overall, PROBASE shows good acceptance of a risk-adapted PCa screening strategy in Germany. Implementation of such a strategy should be accompanied by a well-structured communication, to explain not only the benefits but also the harms of PSA screening.

Histopathological results of radical prostatectomy specimen of men younger than 50 years of age at the time of surgery: possible implications for prostate cancer screening programs?

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer (PCa) detection is usually achieved by PSA measurement and, if indicated, further diagnostics. The recent EAU guidelines recommend a first PSA test at the age of 50 years, if no family history of PCa or BRCA2 mutation exists. However, some men might harbor significant PCa at younger age; thus we evaluated the histopathological results of men treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) in their 40 s at our institution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We relied on the data of all patients who underwent RP in our institution between 1992 and 2020 and were younger than 50 years at the time of surgery. The histopathological results are descriptively presented. Moreover, we tested the effect of a positive family history on the descriptive results.

RESULTS

Overall, 1225 patients younger than 50 years underwent RP at our institution. Median age was 47 years. Most patients showed favorable histopathological characteristics. However, 20% of patients had extraprostatic disease (≥ pT3a), 15% had ISUP Gleason grade group ≥ 3, and 7% had positive lymph nodes (pN1). Patients with a known positive family history did not have a higher rate of adverse disease as their counterparts with a negative family history.

DISCUSSION

Our data show that the majority of patients who were diagnosed with PCa at a very young age had favorable histopathological RP characteristics. However, a non-negligible proportion of patients already showed locally advanced disease and would have probably benefited from earlier PCa detection. This should be kept in mind when PCa screening recommendations are proposed.

Designing and Implementing a Population-based Organised Prostate Cancer Testing Programme

BACKGROUND

European guidelines recommend that well-informed men at elevated risk of having prostate cancer (PCa) should be offered prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing with risk-stratified follow-up. The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare recommends against screening for PCa but supports regional implementation of organised prostate cancer testing (OPT).

OBJECTIVE

To report the process for designing and implementing OPT programmes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Population-based OPT programmes in two Swedish regions, designed to include men aged between 50 and 74 yr, launched in September 2020 for 50-yr-old men.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The number of men invited, the participation rate, and the numbers of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans, urological visits, and biopsies from September 2020 to June 2021 were recorded.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Two Swedish regions co-designed an OPT programme with a risk-stratified diagnostic algorithm based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, MRI findings, and age. An automated administrative system was developed on a nationwide web-based platform. Invitation letters and test results are automatically generated and sent out by post. Men with PSA ≥3ng/ml, a suspicious MRI lesion, and/or PSA density ≥0.15 ng/ml/cm³ are referred for a prostate biopsy. Test results are registered for quality control and research. By June 2021, a total of 16 515 men were invited, of whom 6309 (38%) participated; 147 had an MRI scan and 39 underwent prostate biopsy. The OPT framework, algorithm, and diagnostic pathways have been working well.

CONCLUSIONS

We designed and implemented a framework for OPT with a high grade of automation. The framework and organisational experiences may be of value for others who plan a programme for early detection of PCa.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We describe the implementation of an organised testing programme for early detection of prostate cancer in two Swedish regions. This model is the first of its kind and may serve as a template for similar programmes.