Trial reportThe New England journal of medicine2009
Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial.
Trial report in The New England journal of medicine, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 4 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 1,021 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial
MR Image Guided Focal Therapy in Prostate Cancer
A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing the Efficacy of MRI Versus PSA for Prostate Cancer Screening: The MVP Study (MRI vs PSA)
Evaluation of An Online Intervention In Improving General Practitioners' Practice In Prostate Cancer Screening
Who cites it
1,021 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 2,906 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline of guidelines: a critical appraisal of the evidence for PSA retesting intervals.BJU international · 2025Pooled it
- Shared medical decision in prostate cancer screening in primary care: a systematic literature review of current evidence.International urology and nephrology · 2024Pooled it
- Genetically adjusted PSA levels for prostate cancer screening.Nature medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Application and optimization of prostate-specific antigen screening strategy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- De-implementing low-value care in cancer care delivery: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Models in Prostate Cancer: Exploring New Developments in Testing and Diagnosis.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2022Pooled it
- Knowledge of prostate cancer presentation, etiology, and screening practices among women: a mixed-methods systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Analysis of Body Mass Index in Early and Middle Adulthood and Estimated Risk of Gastrointestinal Cancer.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Prostate Cancer Screening with PSA and MRI Followed by Targeted Biopsy Only.The New England journal of medicine · 2022Trial
- Prostate MRI versus PSA screening for prostate cancer detection (the MVP Study): a randomised clinical trial.BMJ open · 2022Trial
- Gut Microbiome-Dependent Metabolic Pathways and Risk of Lethal Prostate Cancer: Prospective Analysis of a PLCO Cancer Screening Trial Cohort.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022Trial
- Feasibility of dietary folic acid reduction intervention for men on active surveillance for prostate cancer.Clinical nutrition ESPEN · 2021Trial
- Active monitoring, radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy in PSA-detected clinically localised prostate cancer: the ProtecT three-arm RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Trial
- Trial
- European Cancer Prevention Organization on cancer screening: an expert panel position paper.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2026Article
- Context-dependent role of digital rectal examination in a contemporary prostate biopsy cohort: differential predictive value with and without multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.Prostate international · 2026Article
- [Current status of prostate cancer screening research].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2026Review
- Early-Onset Prostate Cancer: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Biology, Clinical Features, Management, and Early Detection.MedComm · 2026Review
- The clinical utility of prostate MRI before biopsy.Nature reviews. Urology · 2026Review
- The evolving role of PSA in prostate cancer screening: revisiting the evidence in the era of personalized medicine.Advances in laboratory medicine · 2026Review
961 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
25 authors at 12 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe effect of screening with prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) testing and digital rectal examination on the rate of death from prostate cancer is unknown. This is the first report from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial on prostate-cancer mortality.
methodsFrom 1993 through 2001, we randomly assigned 76,693 men at 10 U.S. study centers to receive either annual screening (38,343 subjects) or usual care as the control (38,350 subjects). Men in the screening group were offered annual PSA testing for 6 years and digital rectal examination for 4 years. The subjects and health care providers received the results and decided on the type of follow-up evaluation. Usual care sometimes included screening, as some organizations have recommended. The numbers of all cancers and deaths and causes of death were ascertained.
resultsIn the screening group, rates of compliance were 85% for PSA testing and 86% for digital rectal examination. Rates of screening in the control group increased from 40% in the first year to 52% in the sixth year for PSA testing and ranged from 41 to 46% for digital rectal examination. After 7 years of follow-up, the incidence of prostate cancer per 10,000 person-years was 116 (2820 cancers) in the screening group and 95 (2322 cancers) in the control group (rate ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16 to 1.29). The incidence of death per 10,000 person-years was 2.0 (50 deaths) in the screening group and 1.7 (44 deaths) in the control group (rate ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.70). The data at 10 years were 67% complete and consistent with these overall findings.
conclusionsAfter 7 to 10 years of follow-up, the rate of death from prostate cancer was very low and did not differ significantly between the two study groups. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00002540.)
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.