Trial reportCancer causes & control : CCC2012
The impact of PLCO control arm contamination on perceived PSA screening efficacy.
Trial report in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02799303 (A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing the Efficacy of MRI Versus PSA for Prostate Cancer Screening), which is not on this map. Cited by 39 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.
A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing the Efficacy of MRI Versus PSA for Prostate Cancer Screening: The MVP Study (MRI vs PSA)
Who cites it
39 citing papers in PubMed.
- Relationship Between Baseline Prostate-specific Antigen on Cancer Detection and Prostate Cancer Death: Long-term Follow-up from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.European urology · 2023Trial
- Design-corrected variation by centre in mortality reduction in the ERSPC randomised prostate cancer screening trial.Journal of medical screening · 2017Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of prostate cancer screening: a simulation study based on ERSPC data.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2015Trial
- Design and preliminary recruitment results of the Cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for Prostate cancer (CAP).British journal of cancer · 2014Trial
- Limitations of basing screening policies on screening trials: The US Preventive Services Task Force and Prostate Cancer Screening.Medical care · 2013Trial
- The clinical utility of prostate MRI before biopsy.Nature reviews. Urology · 2026Review
- National Cancer Institute's Working Group on Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Clinical Trial Design Considerations.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025Article
- Canadian Prostate Cancer Trends in the Context of PSA Screening Guideline Changes.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Prognostic properties of the baseline prostate-specific antigen value-insights from the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer.Translational andrology and urology · 2024Article
- Mortality reduction and cumulative excess incidence (CEI) in the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening era.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Benefits and harms of prostate specific antigen testing according to Australian guidelines.International journal of cancer · 2024Article
- The Patient Journey from Randomization to Detection of Prostate Cancer and Death: Results from ERSPC Rotterdam.European urology open science · 2023Article
- How Did CNBSS Influence Guidelines for So Long and What Can That Teach Us?Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- Assessment of factors associated with PSA level in prostate cancer cases and controls from three geographical regions.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- When to Discuss Prostate Cancer Screening With Average-Risk Men.American journal of preventive medicine · 2021Article
- Differences in Prostate Cancer Incidence and Mortality in Lower Saxony (Germany) and Groningen Province (Netherlands): Potential Impact of Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Personalized strategies in population screening for prostate cancer.International journal of cancer · 2020Review
- A natural history model for planning prostate cancer testing: Calibration and validation using Swedish registry data.PloS one · 2019Article
- A 24-year prospective study of dietary α-linolenic acid and lethal prostate cancer.International journal of cancer · 2018Article
- The efficacy of prostate-specific antigen screening: Impact of key components in the ERSPC and PLCO trials.Cancer · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo quantify the extent to which a clinically significant prostate cancer mortality reduction due to screening could have been masked by control arm screening (contamination) in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) trial.
methodsWe used three independently developed models of prostate cancer natural history to conduct a virtual PLCO trial. Simulated participants underwent pre-trial screening based on population patterns. The intervention arm followed observed compliance during the trial then resumed population screening. A contaminated control arm followed observed contamination during the trial then resumed population screening, while an uncontaminated control arm discontinued screening upon entry. We assumed a clinically significant screening benefit, applied population treatments and survival patterns, and calculated mortality rate ratios relative to the contaminated and uncontaminated control arms.
resultsThe virtual trial reproduced observed incidence, including stage and grade distributions, and control arm mortality after 10 years of complete follow-up. Under the assumed screening benefit, the three models found that contamination increased the mortality rate ratio from 0.68-0.77 to 0.86-0.91, increased the chance of excess mortality in the intervention arm from 0-4 % to 15-28 %, and decreased the power of the trial to detect a mortality difference from 40-70 % to 9-25 %.
conclusionsOur computer simulation models indicate that contamination substantially limited the ability of the PLCO to identify a clinically significant screening benefit. While the trial shows annual screening does not reduce mortality relative to population screening, contamination prevents concluding whether screening reduces mortality relative to no screening.
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.