Risk of prostate cancer in relatives of prostate cancer patients in Sweden: A nationwide cohort study.


Journal

PLoS medicine
ISSN: 1549-1676
Titre abrégé: PLoS Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101231360

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 2021
Historique:
received: 01 06 2020
accepted: 08 04 2021
entrez: 1 6 2021
pubmed: 2 6 2021
medline: 5 10 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Evidence-based guidance for starting ages of screening for first-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) to prevent stage III/IV or fatal PCa is lacking in current PCa screening guidelines. We aimed to provide evidence for risk-adapted starting age of screening for relatives of patients with PCa. In this register-based nationwide cohort study, all men (aged 0 to 96 years at baseline) residing in Sweden who were born after 1931 along with their fathers were included. During the follow-up (1958 to 2015) of 6,343,727 men, 88,999 were diagnosed with stage III/IV PCa or died of PCa. The outcomes were defined as the diagnosis of stage III/IV PCa or death due to PCa, stratified by age at diagnosis. Using 10-year cumulative risk curves, we calculated risk-adapted starting ages of screening for men with different constellations of family history of PCa. The 10-year cumulative risk of stage III/IV or fatal PCa in men at age 50 in the general population (a common recommended starting age of screening) was 0.2%. Men with ≥2 FDRs diagnosed with PCa reached this screening level at age 41 (95% confidence interval (CI): 39 to 44), i.e., 9 years earlier, when the youngest one was diagnosed before age 60; at age 43 (41 to 47), i.e., 7 years earlier, when ≥2 FDRs were diagnosed after age 59, which was similar to that of men with 1 FDR diagnosed before age 60 (41 to 45); and at age 45 (44 to 46), when 1 FDR was diagnosed at age 60 to 69 and 47 (46 to 47), when 1 FDR was diagnosed after age 69. We also calculated risk-adapted starting ages for other benchmark screening ages, such as 45, 55, and 60 years, and compared our findings with those in the guidelines. Study limitations include the lack of genetic data, information on lifestyle, and external validation. Our study provides practical information for risk-tailored starting ages of PCa screening based on nationwide cancer data with valid genealogical information. Our clinically relevant findings could be used for evidence-based personalized PCa screening guidance and supplement current PCa screening guidelines for relatives of patients with PCa.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Evidence-based guidance for starting ages of screening for first-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) to prevent stage III/IV or fatal PCa is lacking in current PCa screening guidelines. We aimed to provide evidence for risk-adapted starting age of screening for relatives of patients with PCa.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
In this register-based nationwide cohort study, all men (aged 0 to 96 years at baseline) residing in Sweden who were born after 1931 along with their fathers were included. During the follow-up (1958 to 2015) of 6,343,727 men, 88,999 were diagnosed with stage III/IV PCa or died of PCa. The outcomes were defined as the diagnosis of stage III/IV PCa or death due to PCa, stratified by age at diagnosis. Using 10-year cumulative risk curves, we calculated risk-adapted starting ages of screening for men with different constellations of family history of PCa. The 10-year cumulative risk of stage III/IV or fatal PCa in men at age 50 in the general population (a common recommended starting age of screening) was 0.2%. Men with ≥2 FDRs diagnosed with PCa reached this screening level at age 41 (95% confidence interval (CI): 39 to 44), i.e., 9 years earlier, when the youngest one was diagnosed before age 60; at age 43 (41 to 47), i.e., 7 years earlier, when ≥2 FDRs were diagnosed after age 59, which was similar to that of men with 1 FDR diagnosed before age 60 (41 to 45); and at age 45 (44 to 46), when 1 FDR was diagnosed at age 60 to 69 and 47 (46 to 47), when 1 FDR was diagnosed after age 69. We also calculated risk-adapted starting ages for other benchmark screening ages, such as 45, 55, and 60 years, and compared our findings with those in the guidelines. Study limitations include the lack of genetic data, information on lifestyle, and external validation.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study provides practical information for risk-tailored starting ages of PCa screening based on nationwide cancer data with valid genealogical information. Our clinically relevant findings could be used for evidence-based personalized PCa screening guidance and supplement current PCa screening guidelines for relatives of patients with PCa.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34061847
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003616
pii: PMEDICINE-D-20-02475
pmc: PMC8168897
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e1003616

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Références

BMJ. 2015 Mar 04;350:h869
pubmed: 25740625
Lancet. 2019 Aug 17;394(10198):596-603
pubmed: 31395442
Nat Rev Urol. 2009 Jun;6(6):301-3
pubmed: 19498406
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Mar 10;32(8):833-40
pubmed: 24493721
Cancer. 2002 Sep 15;95(6):1346-53
pubmed: 12216104
Eur J Epidemiol. 2017 Sep;32(9):765-773
pubmed: 28983736
Ann Oncol. 2008 Jan;19(1):163-7
pubmed: 17804474
World J Urol. 2012 Apr;30(2):143-8
pubmed: 22116601
Oncologist. 2009 Dec;14(12):1209-17
pubmed: 19939895
Can Urol Assoc J. 2017 Oct;11(10):298-309
pubmed: 29381452
CA Cancer J Clin. 2010 Mar-Apr;60(2):70-98
pubmed: 20200110
Eur Urol. 2013 Mar;63(3):419-25
pubmed: 23083803
Eur J Cancer. 2020 Jan;124:207-213
pubmed: 31761537
Lancet. 2016 Jan 2;387(10013):70-82
pubmed: 26074382
Cancer. 2014 Mar 15;120(6):818-23
pubmed: 24258693
Eur Urol. 2014 Jun;65(6):1046-55
pubmed: 24439788
Acta Oncol. 2009;48(1):27-33
pubmed: 18767000
Int J Cancer. 2011 Oct 15;129(8):1881-8
pubmed: 21154740
Ann Intern Med. 2013 May 21;158(10):761-769
pubmed: 23567643
Cancer. 2020 Jun 15;126(12):2837-2848
pubmed: 32154920
Eur Urol. 2010 Aug;58(2):275-80
pubmed: 20171779
JAMA Oncol. 2020 Jan 1;6(1):68-74
pubmed: 31725845
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2016 May;14(5):509-19
pubmed: 27160230
Genet Med. 2009 Jul;11(7):495-506
pubmed: 19521245
Int J Cancer. 2010 May 15;126(10):2259-67
pubmed: 19642094
JAMA Oncol. 2017 May 1;3(5):705-707
pubmed: 28033446
PLoS Med. 2015 Oct 06;12(10):e1001885
pubmed: 26440803
Ann Oncol. 2012 Jan;23(1):251-256
pubmed: 21467126
Lancet. 2003 Mar 8;361(9360):859-64
pubmed: 12642065
Ann Oncol. 2008 Dec;19(12):2084-8
pubmed: 18653701
Eur Urol Focus. 2018 Jan;4(1):121-127
pubmed: 29162421
Prostate. 2015 Mar 1;75(4):390-8
pubmed: 25408531
BMJ. 2013 Apr 15;346:f2023
pubmed: 23596126
Gastroenterology. 2020 Jul;159(1):159-168.e3
pubmed: 32251666
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Mar 10;32(8):824-9
pubmed: 24493722
J Urol. 2013 Aug;190(2):419-26
pubmed: 23659877
Scand J Urol. 2020 Oct;54(5):376-381
pubmed: 32734806
CA Cancer J Clin. 2016 Jan-Feb;66(1):7-30
pubmed: 26742998
Cancer. 2020 Oct 1;126(19):4371-4378
pubmed: 32697345
BMJ. 2012 Dec 20;345:e8076
pubmed: 23257063
Eur Urol. 2017 Apr;71(4):618-629
pubmed: 27568654
JAMA. 2018 May 8;319(18):1901-1913
pubmed: 29801017
Ann Intern Med. 2012 Jul 17;157(2):120-34
pubmed: 22801674
JAMA. 2018 May 8;319(18):1914-1931
pubmed: 29801018
IARC Sci Publ. 1991;(95):126-58
pubmed: 1894318
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 Sep 8;102(17):1336-43
pubmed: 20724726
BMC Cancer. 2011 May 09;11:163
pubmed: 21554674
Eur Urol. 2019 Jul;76(1):43-51
pubmed: 30824296
CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424
pubmed: 30207593

Auteurs

Xing Xu (X)

Division of Preventive Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.

Elham Kharazmi (E)

Division of Preventive Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.

Yu Tian (Y)

Division of Preventive Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.

Trasias Mukama (T)

Division of Preventive Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.

Kristina Sundquist (K)

Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York City, New York, United States of America.
Center for Community-based Healthcare Research and Education (CoHRE), Department of Functional Pathology, School of Medicine, Shimane University, Izumo, Japan.

Jan Sundquist (J)

Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York City, New York, United States of America.
Center for Community-based Healthcare Research and Education (CoHRE), Department of Functional Pathology, School of Medicine, Shimane University, Izumo, Japan.

Hermann Brenner (H)

Division of Preventive Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.

Mahdi Fallah (M)

Division of Preventive Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH