Current policies on early detection of prostate cancer create overdiagnosis and inequity with minimal benefit

Prostate cancer incidence and mortality in Europe and implications for screening activities: population based study

OBJECTIVE

To provide a baseline comparative assessment of the main epidemiological features of prostate cancer in European populations as background for the proposed EU screening initiatives.

DESIGN

Population based study.

SETTING

26 European countries, 19 in the EU, 1980-2017. National or subnational incidence data were extracted from population based cancer registries from the International Agency for Research on Cancer's Global Cancer Observatory, and mortality data from the World Health Organization.

POPULATION

Men aged 35-84 years from 26 eligible countries.

RESULTS

Over the past decades, incidence rates for prostate cancer varied markedly in both magnitude and rate of change, in parallel with temporal variations in prostate specific antigen testing. The variation in incidence across countries was largest around the mid-2000s, with rates spanning from 46 (Ukraine) to 336 (France) per 100 000 men. Thereafter, incidence started to decline in several countries, but with the latest rates nevertheless remaining raised and increasing again in the most recent quinquennium in several countries. Mortality rates during 1980-2020 were much lower and less variable than incidence rates, with steady declines in most countries and lesser temporal differences between countries. Overall, the up to 20-fold variation in prostate cancer incidence contrasts with a corresponding fivefold variation in mortality. Also, the inverse U-shape of the age specific curves for incidence contrasted with the mortality pattern, which increased progressively with age. The difference between the highest and lowest incidence rates across countries ranged from 89.6 per 100 000 men in 1985 to 385.8 per 100 000 men in 2007, while mortality rates across countries ranged from 23.7 per 100 000 men in 1983 to 35.6 per 100 000 men in 2006.

CONCLUSIONS

The epidemiological features of prostate cancer presented here are indicative of overdiagnosis varying over time and across populations. Although the results are ecological in nature and must be interpreted with caution, they do support previous recommendations that any future implementation of prostate cancer screening must be carefully designed with an emphasis on minimising the harms of overdiagnosis.

PSA screening for prostate cancer in the United States: 30 years of controversy

In 1994, the United States approved the Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) test as a screening tool for prostate cancer. It did so despite the test's inherent weakness: not being prostate cancer specific. Subsequent randomized trials yielded conflicting results as to its benefits. Medical guideline organizations are concerned that PSA screening results in the diagnosis and treatment of clinically indolent prostate cancer. Nevertheless, PSA screening is prevalent in North America and Europe with PSA screening increasing in other regions. We provide a critical review of the major factors that led to the prevalence of PSA screening in the United States despite the debate about its benefits. Public advocacy in favor of the test and failure of the medical community to appreciate its inherent weakness led to widespread adoption. These factors persist today. Other countries need to carefully analyze the utility of the PSA test before adopting it.

Key learning on the promise and limitations of MRI in prostate cancer screening

MRI retains its ability to reduce the harm of prostate biopsies by decreasing biopsy rates and the detection of indolent cancers in population-based screening studies aiming to find clinically significant prostate cancers. Limitations of low positive predictive values and high reader variability in diagnostic performance require optimisations in patient selection, imaging protocols, interpretation standards, diagnostic thresholds, and biopsy methods. Improvements in diagnostic accuracy could come about through emerging technologies like risk calculators and polygenic risk scores to select men for MRI. Furthermore, artificial intelligence and workflow optimisations focused on streamlining the diagnostic pathway, quality control, and assurance measures will improve MRI variability. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: MRI significantly reduces harm in prostate cancer screening, lowering unnecessary biopsies and minimizing the overdiagnosis of indolent cancers. MRI maintains the effective detection of high-grade cancers, thus improving the overall benefit-to-harm ratio in population-based screenings with or without using serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for patient selection. KEY POINTS: • The use of MRI enables the harm reduction benefits seen in individual early cancer detection to be extended to both risk-stratified and non-stratified prostate cancer screening populations. • MRI limitations include a low positive predictive value and imperfect reader variability, which require standardising interpretations, biopsy methods, and integration into a quality diagnostic pathway. • Current evidence is based on one-time point use of MRI in screening; MRI effectiveness in multiple rounds of screening is not well-documented.

[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.

Genetics of prostate cancer: a review of latest evidence

Prostate cancer (PrCa) is a largely heritable and polygenic disease. It is the most common cancer in people with prostates (PwPs) in Europe and the USA, including in PwPs of African descent. In the UK in 2020, 52% of all cancers were diagnosed at stage I or II. The National Health Service (NHS) long-term plan is to increase this to 75% by 2028, to reduce absolute incidence of late-stage disease. In the absence of a UK PrCa screening programme, we should explore how to identify those at increased risk of clinically significant PrCa.Incorporating genomics into the PrCa screening, diagnostic and treatment pathway has huge potential for transforming patient care. Genomics can increase efficiency of PrCa screening by focusing on those with genetic predisposition to cancer-which when combined with risk factors such as age and ethnicity, can be used for risk stratification in risk-based screening (RBS) programmes. The goal of RBS is to facilitate early diagnosis of clinically significant PrCa and reduce overdiagnosis/overtreatment in those unlikely to experience PrCa-related symptoms in their lifetime. Genetic testing can guide PrCa management, by identifying those at risk of lethal PrCa and enabling access to novel targeted therapies.PrCa is curable if diagnosed below stage III when most people do not experience symptoms. RBS using genetic profiling could be key here if we could show better survival outcomes (or reduction in cancer-specific mortality accounting for lead-time bias), in addition to more cost efficiency than age-based screening alone. Furthermore, PrCa outcomes in underserved communities could be optimised if genetic testing was accessible, minimising health disparities.

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.

Evaluating whether Prostate Cancer UK's risk checker is a help or hindrance to prostate-specific antigen testing policy: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

The UK has an informed choice testing policy for prostate cancer. The prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood test is available for free to any man aged ≥50 years who requests it and has been informed of the harms and benefits. This policy leads to differences in PSA testing rates, which can exacerbate health inequalities.

AIM

To assess whether Prostate Cancer UK's risk checker helps men at risk of prostate cancer make an informed choice about the PSA test.

DESIGN & SETTING

Mixed-methods study in the UK.

METHOD

In total, 1181 men at risk, their partners, and clinical experts participated in surveys, focus groups, and one-to-one interviews. Data on risk checker completions by sociodemographic factors were analysed over time. Data from general practices that sent the risk checker to their patients were collected and analysed for service monitoring purposes.

RESULTS

There was a strong assumption that testing must be good, and therefore a need to emphasise the pros and cons of the test and that having it was the patient's decision. Men believed their GP would invite them for PSA testing. On the impact of the risk checker, 79.6% of men who completed it had at least one prostate cancer risk factor; the average time they interacted with the information in the tool was 9 minutes 28 seconds; and 75.7% felt the tool had equipped them to make an informed choice.

CONCLUSION

Online decision-making tools, such as the risk checker, can help reach men at high risk of prostate cancer and support them in making an informed choice about the PSA test.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly integrated within the prostate cancer (PCa) early detection pathway.

Objective

To systematically evaluate the existing evidence regarding screening pathways incorporating MRI with targeted biopsy and assess their diagnostic value compared with prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening with systematic biopsy strategies.

Data Sources

PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane/Central, Scopus, and Web of Science (through May 2023).

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies were eligible if they reported data on the diagnostic utility of prostate MRI in the setting of PCa screening.

Data Extraction

Number of screened individuals, biopsy indications, biopsies performed, clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined as International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 or higher, and insignificant (ISUP1) PCas detected were extracted.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was csPCa detection rate. Secondary outcomes included clinical insignificant PCa detection rate, biopsy indication rates, and the positive predictive value for the detection of csPCa.

Data Synthesis

The generalized mixed-effect approach with pooled odds ratios (ORs) and random-effect models was used to compare the MRI-based and PSA-only screening strategies. Separate analyses were performed based on the timing of MRI (primary/sequential after a PSA test) and cutoff (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] score ≥3 or ≥4) for biopsy indication.

Results

Data were synthesized from 80 114 men from 12 studies. Compared with standard PSA-based screening, the MRI pathway (sequential screening, PI-RADS score ≥3 cutoff for biopsy) was associated with higher odds of csPCa when tests results were positive (OR, 4.15; 95% CI, 2.93-5.88; P ≤ .001), decreased odds of biopsies (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.22-0.36; P ≤ .001), and insignificant cancers detected (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.23-0.49; P = .002) without significant differences in the detection of csPCa (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.75-1.37; P = .86). Implementing a PI-RADS score of 4 or greater threshold for biopsy selection was associated with a further reduction in the odds of detecting insignificant PCa (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.05-0.97; P = .048) and biopsies performed (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09-0.38; P = .01) without differences in csPCa detection (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.49-1.45; P = .22).

Conclusion and relevance

The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that integrating MRI in PCa screening pathways is associated with a reduced number of unnecessary biopsies and overdiagnosis of insignificant PCa while maintaining csPCa detection as compared with PSA-only screening.

Prostate cancer screening in Switzerland: a literature review and consensus statement from the Swiss Society of Urology

Over a decade ago, the United States Preventive Services Taskforce (USPSTF) recommended against prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer in all men, which considerably influenced prostate cancer screening policies worldwide after that. Consequently, the world has seen increasing numbers of advanced stages and prostate cancer deaths, which later led the USPSTF to withdraw its initial statement. Meanwhile, the European Union has elaborated a directive to address the problem of implementing prostate cancer screening in "Europe's Beating Cancer Plan". In Switzerland, concerned urologists formed an open Swiss Prostate Cancer Screening Group to improve the early detection of prostate cancer. On the 20th of September 2023, during the annual general assembly of the Swiss Society of Urology (SGU/SSU) in Lausanne, members positively voted for a stepwise approach to evaluate the feasibility of implementing organised prostate cancer screening programs in Switzerland. The following article will summarise the events and scientific advances in the last decade during which evidence and promising additional modalities to complement PSA-based prostate cancer screening have emerged. It also aims to provide an overview of contemporary strategies and their potential harms and benefits.

Medicalization of Old Age: Experiencing Healthism and Overdiagnosis in a Nordic Welfare State

In Denmark, people are expected to take responsibility for their health, not least as their bodies age and they experience signs of physical or mental decline. Drawing on fieldwork among older Danes, I illustrate that an excessive focus on health gives rise to social and structural controversies and disparities, linking ideas of healthy behavior at the individual level with the societal framing of disease and aging. I argue that this emphasis contributes to the unwarranted diagnosis of bodily variations that naturally occur in the aging process, a phenomenon referred to as overdiagnosis, adding to a broader medicalization of old age.

Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening and 15-Year Prostate Cancer Mortality: A Secondary Analysis of the CAP Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer (CAP) reported no effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer mortality at a median 10-year follow-up (primary outcome), but the long-term effects of PSA screening on prostate cancer mortality remain unclear.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of a single invitation for PSA screening on prostate cancer-specific mortality at a median 15-year follow-up compared with no invitation for screening.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This secondary analysis of the CAP randomized clinical trial included men aged 50 to 69 years identified at 573 primary care practices in England and Wales. Primary care practices were randomized between September 25, 2001, and August 24, 2007, and men were enrolled between January 8, 2002, and January 20, 2009. Follow-up was completed on March 31, 2021.

Intervention

Men received a single invitation for a PSA screening test with subsequent diagnostic tests if the PSA level was 3.0 ng/mL or higher. The control group received standard practice (no invitation).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was reported previously. Of 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, results of 4 were reported previously. The 4 remaining prespecified secondary outcomes at 15-year follow-up were prostate cancer-specific mortality, all-cause mortality, and prostate cancer stage and Gleason grade at diagnosis.

Results

Of 415 357 eligible men (mean [SD] age, 59.0 [5.6] years), 98% were included in these analyses. Overall, 12 013 and 12 958 men with a prostate cancer diagnosis were in the intervention and control groups, respectively (15-year cumulative risk, 7.08% [95% CI, 6.95%-7.21%] and 6.94% [95% CI, 6.82%-7.06%], respectively). At a median 15-year follow-up, 1199 men in the intervention group (0.69% [95% CI, 0.65%-0.73%]) and 1451 men in the control group (0.78% [95% CI, 0.73%-0.82%]) died of prostate cancer (rate ratio [RR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99]; P = .03). Compared with the control, the PSA screening intervention increased detection of low-grade (Gleason score [GS] ≤6: 2.2% vs 1.6%; P < .001) and localized (T1/T2: 3.6% vs 3.1%; P < .001) disease but not intermediate (GS of 7), high-grade (GS ≥8), locally advanced (T3), or distally advanced (T4/N1/M1) tumors. There were 45 084 all-cause deaths in the intervention group (23.2% [95% CI, 23.0%-23.4%]) and 50 336 deaths in the control group (23.3% [95% CI, 23.1%-23.5%]) (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.94-1.01]; P = .11). Eight of the prostate cancer deaths in the intervention group (0.7%) and 7 deaths in the control group (0.5%) were related to a diagnostic biopsy or prostate cancer treatment.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, a single invitation for PSA screening compared with standard practice without routine screening reduced prostate cancer deaths at a median follow-up of 15 years. However, the absolute reduction in deaths was small.

Trial Registration

isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN92187251.

Variation in harms and benefits of prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer by socio-clinical risk factors: A rapid review

Objective

To analyse the latest evidence on the relative harms and benefits of screening and diagnostic pathways with close examination of (i) men aged 50 years or older, (ii) men whose ethnicity places them at higher risk and (iii) men with a family history.

Methods

We conducted a literature search using PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases and other sources, from January 1990 to 25 January 2023. Two independent reviewers selected for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies which met our inclusion criteria.

Results

Twenty-eight articles were selected, from six trials, including the Göteborg trial-reported separately from European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). Prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening led to the increased detection of low-grade cancer and reduction of advanced/metastatic disease but had contradictory effects on prostate cancer (PCa)-specific mortality (no difference or reduced), possibly due to issues of contamination or compliance. Screening men from a relatively young age (50-55) reduced risk of PCa-specific mortality in a subanalysis of an 18-year follow-up study and in a 17-year cohort study from the main Göteborg trial. Moreover, one Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial analysis reported a trend of reduced risk of PCa-specific mortality for men with a family history who were screened. [Correction added on 05 March 2024, after first online publication: "Cancer Screening Trial" has been added to the preceding sentence.] However, we did not find relevant studies for ethnicity.

Conclusion

Under current UK practice, the choice to conduct a PSA test relies on a shared decision-making approach guided by known risk factors. However, we found there was a lack of strong evidence on the harms and benefits of PSA screening by socio-clinical risk factors and suggest further research is required to understand the long-term impact of screening on high-risk populations in the current diagnostic setting.

Association between patient ethnicity and prostate cancer diagnosis following a prostate-specific antigen test: a cohort study of 730,000 men in primary care in the UK

BACKGROUND

Black men have higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and higher prostate cancer incidence and mortality than White men, while Asian men tend to have lower prostate cancer incidence and mortality than White men. Much of the evidence comes from the USA, and information from UK populations is limited.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used data on patients registered at general practices in England contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum dataset. Those eligible were men aged 40 and over with a record of ethnicity and a PSA test result recorded between 2010 and 2017 with no prior cancer diagnosis. The aim was to assess the incidence of prostate cancer following a raised PSA test result in men from different ethnic groups. Additionally, incidence of advanced prostate cancer was investigated. Cancer incidence was estimated from multi-level logistic regression models adjusting for potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

730,515 men with a PSA test were included (88.9% White). Black men and men with mixed ethnicity had higher PSA values, particularly for those aged above 60 years. In the year following a raised PSA result (using age-specific thresholds), Black men had the highest prostate cancer incidence at 24.7% (95% CI 23.3%, 26.2%); Asian men had the lowest at 13.4% (12.2%, 14.7%); incidence for White men was 19.8% (19.4%, 20.2%). The peak incidence of prostate cancer for all groups was in men aged 70-79. Incidence of prostate cancer diagnosed at an advanced stage was similar between Black and White men.

CONCLUSIONS

More prostate cancer was diagnosed in Black men with a raised PSA result, but rates of advanced prostate cancer were not higher in this group. In this large primary care-based cohort, the incidence of prostate cancer in men with elevated PSA levels increases with increasing age, even when using age-adjusted thresholds, with Black men significantly more likely to be diagnosed compared to White or Asian men. The incidence of advanced stage prostate cancer at diagnosis was similar for Black and White men with a raised PSA result, but lower for Asian men.

Health Policy for Prostate Cancer Early Detection in the European Union and the Impact of Opportunistic Screening: PRAISE-U Consortium

With the new policy recommendation in 2022 to explore the possibilities of screening for prostate cancer by the European Commission, the landscape for prostate cancer early detection is evolving. In line with this recommendation, the PRAISE-U project aims to evaluate the early detection and diagnosis of prostate cancer through customised and risk-based screening programmes, with the goal to align protocols across European Union member states. This systematic review is part of the PRAISE-U project, with the goal to review the policy, medical guideline recommendations, and the current level of opportunistic screening presented in the scientific literature on prostate cancer early detection from 2016 to 2023 in European Union member states. An extensive literature search was performed on 1 June 2023 in a large number of databases, including Embase.com, Medline (Ovid), Web of Science Core Collection, Google Scholar, and Policy Commons. We identified 318 articles (qualitative, quantitative, and reviews), of which 41 were included in the full-text screening. Seventeen articles were ultimately identified as eligible for inclusion. The included articles revealed significant variations towards PSA-based early detection policies for prostate cancer in nine European countries. Despite official recommendations, opportunistic screening was prevalent across all nine countries regardless of recommendations for or against PSA-based early detection. This systematic review suggests that the current early detection policies are not fit for purpose. High levels of opportunistic screening and overdiagnosis persist, prompting policy recommendations for standardised guidelines, informed decision making, and increased awareness to improve efficiency and effectiveness in early detection.