Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24867688›Full record

Trial reportBritish journal of cancer2014

Design and preliminary recruitment results of the Cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for Prostate cancer (CAP).

E L Turner, C Metcalfe, J L Donovan, S Noble, J A C Sterne, J A Lane, K N Avery, L Down, E Walsh, M Davis and 13 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in British journal of cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Recommandations de l'Association des urologues du Canada sur le dépistage et le diagnostic précoce du cancer de la prostate.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2017
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

23 authors.

E L TurnerSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
C MetcalfeSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
J L DonovanSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
S NobleSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
J A C SterneSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
J A LaneSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
K N AverySchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
L DownSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
E WalshSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
M DavisSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
Y Ben-ShlomoSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
S E OliverDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York and the Hull York Medical School, York YO10 5DD, UK.
S EvansRoyal United Hospital Bath, Combe Park, Bath BA1 3NG, UK.
P BrindleAvon Primary Care Research Collaborative, Marlborough Street, South Plaza, Bristol BS1 3NX, UK.
N J WilliamsSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield S10 2JF, UK.
L J HughesDepartment of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Box 279 (S4), Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.
E M HillSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
C DaviesSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
S Y NgSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Freeman Hospital, High Heaton, Newcastle upon Tyne NE7 7DN, UK.
D E NealDepartment of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Box 279 (S4), Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.
F C HamdyNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK.
R M Martin1] School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK [2] MRC/University of Bristol Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove, Bristol BS8 2BN, UK.
CAP trial group

Funding

Cancer Research UK C11043/A4286Cancer Research UK C18281/A11326Cancer Research UK C18281/A15064Cancer Research UK C18281/A8145Department of HealthMedical Research Council MR/K025643/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundScreening for prostate cancer continues to generate controversy because of concerns about over-diagnosis and unnecessary treatment. We describe the rationale, design and recruitment of the Cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for Prostate cancer (CAP) trial, a UK-wide cluster randomised controlled trial investigating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing.

methodsSeven hundred and eighty-five general practitioner (GP) practices in England and Wales were randomised to a population-based PSA testing or standard care and then approached for consent to participate. In the intervention arm, men aged 50-69 years were invited to undergo PSA testing, and those diagnosed with localised prostate cancer were invited into a treatment trial. Control arm practices undertook standard UK management. All men were flagged with the Health and Social Care Information Centre for deaths and cancer registrations. The primary outcome is prostate cancer mortality at a median 10-year-follow-up.

resultsAmong randomised practices, 271 (68%) in the intervention arm (198,114 men) and 302 (78%) in the control arm (221,929 men) consented to participate, meeting pre-specified power requirements. There was little evidence of differences between trial arms in measured baseline characteristics of the consenting GP practices (or men within those practices).

conclusionsThe CAP trial successfully met its recruitment targets and will make an important contribution to international understanding of PSA-based prostate cancer screening.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisEarly Detection of CancerEnglandGeneral PractitionersHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsResearch DesignWalesProstate-Specific Antigen

Identifiers

PMID24867688
PMCPMC4056057

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.