From Screening to Mortality Reduction: An Overview of Empirical Data on the Patient Journey in European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Rotterdam After 21 Years of Follow-up and a Reflection on Quality of Life.

Active surveillance Overdiagnosis Overtreatment Prostate-specific antigen Prostatic neoplasm Quality of life Screening

Journal

European urology oncology
ISSN: 2588-9311
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol Oncol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101724904

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 Sep 2023
Historique:
received: 30 06 2023
revised: 13 08 2023
accepted: 23 08 2023
medline: 11 9 2023
pubmed: 11 9 2023
entrez: 10 9 2023
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Previous research quantified the effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based prostate cancer (PCa) screening on quality-adjusted life years using 11-yr follow-up data from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) extrapolated by the Microsimulation Screening Analysis (MISCAN). ERSPC data now matured to 21 yr of follow-up. To provide an overview of the effect of PSA-based screening on tumour characteristics and PCa treatment using long-term, detailed, empirical ERSPC data. Men were included from the ERSPC Rotterdam who were randomised to a PSA-based screening (S) or control (C) arm. We assessed the effects of PSA-based screening on the number of PCa diagnoses, tumour characteristics, treatments, and cumulative incidence of disease progression. We also evaluated the changes in tumour characteristics and treatments over time for both study arms. Among PCa patients in the S-arm, fewer patients were diagnosed with advanced tumour stages (T3/T4: 12% vs 23%; relative risk [RR] = 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44-0.57), less disease progression was observed, and less secondary treatment (30% vs 48%; RR = 0.61; 95% CI 0.57-0.66; p < 0.001) and less palliative treatment were needed (21% vs 55%; RR = 0.38; 95% CI 0.35-0.42) than among those in the C-arm. This was at the cost of overdiagnosis and increased local treatments (eg, radical prostatectomy: 32% vs 14%; RR = 2.18; 95% CI 1.92-2.48). Over time, the number of local treatments decreased, whereas expectant management strategies increased. The RRs of treatments were slightly different from those of the MISCAN. After 21 yr of follow-up, empirical data of the ERSPC showed that PSA-based screening reduces advanced PCa stages, disease progression, and extensive treatments at the cost of more overdiagnosis and probably more overtreatment. Our data showed reduced local treatments and increased expectant management strategies over time. Prostate-specific antigen-based screening reduces the number of invasive prostate cancer treatments needed, however, at the cost of more overdiagnosis and probably more overtreatment. Limiting these costs remains crucial to benefit optimally from prostate cancer screening.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Previous research quantified the effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based prostate cancer (PCa) screening on quality-adjusted life years using 11-yr follow-up data from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) extrapolated by the Microsimulation Screening Analysis (MISCAN). ERSPC data now matured to 21 yr of follow-up.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
To provide an overview of the effect of PSA-based screening on tumour characteristics and PCa treatment using long-term, detailed, empirical ERSPC data.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS METHODS
Men were included from the ERSPC Rotterdam who were randomised to a PSA-based screening (S) or control (C) arm.
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS METHODS
We assessed the effects of PSA-based screening on the number of PCa diagnoses, tumour characteristics, treatments, and cumulative incidence of disease progression. We also evaluated the changes in tumour characteristics and treatments over time for both study arms.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS CONCLUSIONS
Among PCa patients in the S-arm, fewer patients were diagnosed with advanced tumour stages (T3/T4: 12% vs 23%; relative risk [RR] = 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44-0.57), less disease progression was observed, and less secondary treatment (30% vs 48%; RR = 0.61; 95% CI 0.57-0.66; p < 0.001) and less palliative treatment were needed (21% vs 55%; RR = 0.38; 95% CI 0.35-0.42) than among those in the C-arm. This was at the cost of overdiagnosis and increased local treatments (eg, radical prostatectomy: 32% vs 14%; RR = 2.18; 95% CI 1.92-2.48). Over time, the number of local treatments decreased, whereas expectant management strategies increased. The RRs of treatments were slightly different from those of the MISCAN.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
After 21 yr of follow-up, empirical data of the ERSPC showed that PSA-based screening reduces advanced PCa stages, disease progression, and extensive treatments at the cost of more overdiagnosis and probably more overtreatment. Our data showed reduced local treatments and increased expectant management strategies over time.
PATIENT SUMMARY RESULTS
Prostate-specific antigen-based screening reduces the number of invasive prostate cancer treatments needed, however, at the cost of more overdiagnosis and probably more overtreatment. Limiting these costs remains crucial to benefit optimally from prostate cancer screening.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37690917
pii: S2588-9311(23)00172-4
doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.08.011
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Renée Hogenhout (R)

Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: r.hogenhout@erasmusmc.nl.

Sebastiaan Remmers (S)

Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Marlies E van Slooten-Midderigh (ME)

Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Ivo I de Vos (II)

Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Monique J Roobol (MJ)

Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Classifications MeSH