ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2011
Battling prostate cancer with 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors: a pyrrhic victory?
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adverse effects of 5α-reductase inhibitors: What do we know, don't know, and need to know?Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2015Review
- The dark side of 5α-reductase inhibitors' therapy: sexual dysfunction, high Gleason grade prostate cancer and depression.Korean journal of urology · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Given the relatively small impact of prostate cancer screening on cancer mortality, experts are now suggesting that chemoprevention with 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors (5-ARI) may be a more effective strategy for cancer control. Two large placebo-controlled randomized trials found that men receiving 5-ARI were about 25% less likely than controls to be detected with cancer. However, most cancers were detected on routine biopsies required by study protocols. The benefit from receiving 5-ARI was minimal among men who underwent biopsy for clinical indications. Additionally, men receiving 5-ARI were more likely than controls to be diagnosed with high-grade cancers, though post-hoc analyses adjusting for biases accounted for the excess risk in one of the studies. A recent guideline recommended that men considering prostate cancer screening also consider chemoprevention. The rationale is that reducing cancer incidence, given the known risks for overdiagnosis and subsequent overtreatment, is sufficient justification for chemoprevention. However, a large randomized controlled trial found that screening was associated with a 70% increase in prostate cancer diagnosis--which chemoprevention would then reduce by 25%. This does not seem an acceptable trade-off especially because the potential increased risk for high-grade cancers could lead to higher cancer mortality.
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.