Reported family history of cancer in 1,271 prostate cancer cases and 1,909 controls

How a population-based cohort of men estimate lifetime risk of prostate cancer in a survey before entering a prostate cancer screening trial in Sweden?

OBJECTIVES

Investigating men's perceived lifetime risk of prostate cancer.

DESIGN

Survey-based study to men invited for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in the GÖTEBORG-2 trial between September 2015 and June 2020.

SETTING

38 775 men in the Gothenburg area, Sweden, were invited for PSA-testing and participated in a survey.

PARTICIPANTS

17 980 men participated in PSA-testing, of whom 13 189 completed the survey. In addition, 1264 men answered the survey only.

INTERVENTIONS

Before having the PSA-test, men answered an electronic survey and estimated their lifetime risk of receiving a prostate cancer diagnosis on a visual analogue scale from 0% to 100%.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the median lifetime risk estimation, which was compared with Wilcoxon test to an anticipated lifetime risk of 20% (based on GÖTEBORG-1 trial). The secondary outcome was to determine factors associated with risk estimation in a multivariable linear regression model: previous prostate examination, family history, physical exercise, healthy diet, comorbidity, alcohol consumption, smoking, education level, marital status, urinary symptoms and erectile dysfunction.

RESULTS

Among PSA-tested men, the median estimated lifetime risk of prostate cancer was 30% (IQR 19% to 50%), corresponding to a 10 percentage-points higher estimation compared with the anticipated risk (p<0.001). Family history of prostate cancer, moderate to severe urinary symptoms and mild to moderate erectile dysfunction were associated with >5 percentage-points higher risk estimation. Similar results were obtained for non-PSA-tested men.

CONCLUSIONS

Most men overestimated their prostate cancer risk which underscores the importance of providing them accurate information about prostate cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN94604465.

An epidemiological reappraisal of the familial aggregation of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis

Studies on familial aggregation of cancer may suggest an overall contribution of inherited genes or a shared environment in the development of malignant disease. We performed a meta-analysis on familial clustering of prostate cancer. Out of 74 studies reporting data on familial aggregation of prostate cancer in unselected populations retrieved by a Pubmed search and browsing references, 33 independent studies meeting the inclusion criteria were used in the analysis performed with the random effects model. The pooled rate ratio (RR) for first-degree family history, i.e. affected father or brother, is 2.48 (95% confidence interval: 2.25-2.74). The incidence rate for men who have a brother who got prostate cancer increases 3.14 times (CI:2.37-4.15), and for those with affected father 2.35 times (CI:2.02-2.72). The pooled estimate of RR for two or more affected first-degree family members relative to no history in father and in brother is 4.39 (CI:2.61-7.39). First-degree family history appears to increase the incidence rate of prostate cancer more in men under 65 (RR:2.87, CI:2.21-3.74), than in men aged 65 and older (RR:1.92, CI:1.49-2.47), p for interaction = 0.002. The attributable fraction among those having an affected first-degree relative equals to 59.7% (CI:55.6-63.5%) for men at all ages, 65.2% (CI:57.7-71.4%) for men younger than 65 and 47.9% (CI:37.1-56.8%) for men aged 65 or older. For those with a family history in 2 or more first-degree family members 77.2% (CI:65.4-85.0%) of prostate cancer incidence can be attributed to the familial clustering. Our combined estimates show strong familial clustering and a significant effect-modification by age meaning that familial aggregation was associated with earlier disease onset (before age 65).

Perceived risk and worry about prostate cancer: a proposed conceptual model

Prostate cancer is one of the most common forms of cancer among American men, and worry about the disease has psychological, behavioral, and biological consequences. To better understand prostate cancer-specific worry, the authors tested a model of the interrelationships among family history of prostate cancer; perceived risk of and worry about prostate cancer; and perceived risk of and worry about other diseases. Men who attended prostate cancer-screening appointments at a general urology practice (n=209) were given a brief anonymous self-report measure. Structural equation modeling (LISREL) results indicated: (1) perceived risk of prostate cancer mediated the relationship between family history of prostate cancer and prostate cancer worry; (2) perceived risk of other diseases increased perceived risk of prostate cancer; and (3) prostate cancer worry and increased other disease worry.

Familial and hereditary prostate cancer in southern Sweden. A population-based case-control study

The objectives of this study were to investigate the effect of family history on prostate cancer risk, to estimate the incidence of hereditary prostate cancer in southern Sweden and to assess the reliability of self-reported family history of prostate cancer. The study included consecutive prostate cancer patients and age-matched control subjects from a geographically defined population. The controls consisted of 1 male patient with malignant melanoma or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and 1 male from the community per prostate cancer case. Family history was assessed with questionnaires, and diagnoses of fathers and brothers of cases were validated by the Southern Swedish Regional Tumour Registry. Among fathers and brothers whose names and birth dates were available, 56 (92%) of the 61 reported prostate cancer diagnoses were verified. Fifteen per cent of 356 cases and 5.0% of 712 controls reported at least 1 case of prostate cancer among their brothers or fathers, giving a relative risk of 3.2 (95% confidence interval 2.1-5.1). The relative risk increased with decreasing age at diagnosis of the patient. Based on the pedigree, 3.1% of the 356 patients were classified as having hereditary prostate cancer. This proportion was significantly higher among patients diagnosed before the age of 60 years (7.1%) than among older patients (2.2%). We conclude that there is a substantially increased risk of prostate cancer for sons and brothers of prostate cancer patients. The risk increases with decreasing age at diagnosis of the patient as an effect of a higher prevalence of hereditary prostate among early onset cases. Furthermore, we found self-reported family history of prostate cancer to be a valid estimate of the true incidence of prostate cancer in fathers and brothers of men with prostate cancer.

The risk of malignant tumours in first-degree relatives of men with early onset prostate cancer: a population-based cohort study

Previous studies have indicated that hereditary prostate cancer is common among men with early onset prostate cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of malignant tumours in first-degree relatives of men with early onset prostate cancer. All prostate cancer cases diagnosed before the age of 51 years from 1958 to 1994 were identified in the population-based Swedish Cancer Register. The first-degree relatives of clinical cases were identified through parish data. Their vital status and cancer incidence were studied in the Swedish Cancer Register, the Cause of Death Register and the Census Register. The expected incidence of malignant tumours for the first-degree relatives were calculated using regional cancer register data. Cause-specific standardised incidence ratios (SIR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. The study included 423 first-degree relatives of 89 men with clinical prostate cancer. The first-degree relatives' SIR for malignant tumours was 0.99 (95% CI 0.78-1.23). The SIR for prostate cancer diagnosed at any age was 1.43 (95% CI 0.82-2.33), and 3.37 for first-degree relatives diagnosed before the age of 70 years (95% CI 1.36-6.94). There was no significantly increased risk of any non-prostatic malignant tumour. Only in five of the families did the pedigree show a pattern of hereditary prostate cancer. The first-degree relatives of men with early onset prostate cancer had more than a 3-fold increase in the risk of developing prostate cancer before the age of 70 years, but their total cancer risk was not increased. This study does not support the assumption that dominantly inherited susceptibility is a major cause of early onset prostate cancer.

Sons of men with prostate cancer: their attitudes regarding possible inheritance of prostate cancer, screening, and genetic testing

OBJECTIVES

To study attitudes regarding possible inheritance of prostate cancer among sons of men with prostate cancer.

METHODS

A questionnaire was sent to 69 men with prostate cancer and their 101 unaffected sons. All participants were also interviewed by telephone. Sociodemographic data were collected, as were data about the fathers' disease.

RESULTS

The response rate was high; 100 sons (99%) and 65 fathers (94%) answered all questions. Sixty of the sons claimed they had worries about having an increased risk of prostate cancer due to possible inheritance. About 90% of the sons wanted to know whether prostate cancer was inheritable (66 definitely and 24 probably), were positively inclined to undergo screening (65 definitely and 27 probably), and to undergo genetic testing (50 definitely and 41 probably), provided there had been multiple cases of prostate cancer in their family. An interest to know whether prostate cancer could be inherited was more frequent among sons with less than 12 years of education, worries about inheritance, younger age, a father treated with curative intent, and with children of their own, especially if sons. Interest in genetic testing was associated with less than 12 years of education and with worries about inheritance.

CONCLUSIONS

A large majority of healthy men with a family history of prostate cancer were interested in knowing whether the disease could be inherited and were positively inclined to undergo screening and genetic testing. Our findings indicate that genetic counseling and a screening program could have beneficial psychological effects in families with multiple cases of prostate cancer.