Trial reportBritish journal of cancer2012
To be screened or not to be screened? Modeling the consequences of PSA screening for the individual.
Trial report in British journal of cancer, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled 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
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Prostate Cancer Screening in the UK: A Decision Model Analysis Based on the CAP Trial.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of prostate cancer screening: a simulation study based on ERSPC data.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2015Trial
- Consensus on the Treatment and Follow-Up for the Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Report From the First Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries.JCO global oncology · 2021Article
- Consensus on Treatment and Follow-Up for Biochemical Recurrence in Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Report From the First Global Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries.JCO global oncology · 2021Article
- Review
- Methodological aspects of the molecular and histological study of prostate cancer: focus on PTEN.Methods (San Diego, Calif.) · 2015Review
- Treatment of local-regional prostate cancer detected by PSA screening: benefits and harms according to prognostic factors.British journal of cancer · 2013Article
- The genetics of neuroendocrine prostate cancers: a review of current and emerging candidates.The application of clinical genetics · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundScreening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) can reduce prostate cancer mortality, but may advance diagnosis and treatment in time and lead to overdetection and overtreatment. We estimated benefits and adverse effects of PSA screening for individuals who are deciding whether or not to be screened.
methodsUsing a microsimulation model, we estimated lifetime probabilities of prostate cancer diagnosis and death, overall life expectancy and expected time to diagnosis, both with and without screening. We calculated anticipated loss in quality of life due to prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment that would be acceptable to decide in favour of screening.
resultsMen who were screened had a gain in life expectancy of 0.08 years but their expected time to diagnosis decreased by 1.53 life-years. Of the screened men, 0.99% gained on average 8.08 life-years and for 17.43% expected time to diagnosis decreased by 8.78 life-years. These figures imply that the anticipated loss in quality of life owing to diagnosis and treatment should not exceed 4.8%, for screening to have a positive effect on quality-adjusted life expectancy.
conclusionThe decision to be screened should depend on personal preferences. The negative impact of screening might be reduced by screening men who are more willing to accept the side effects from treatment.
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.