Trial reportEuropean urology2016
Lethal Prostate Cancer in the PLCO Cancer Screening Trial.
Trial report in European urology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Results from 22 years of Followup in the Göteborg Randomized Population-Based Prostate Cancer Screening Trial.The Journal of urology · 2022Trial
- Correlation between Prostatitis, Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia and Prostate Cancer: A systematic review and Meta-analysis.Journal of Cancer · 2020Article
- Prostate cancer screening-when to start and how to screen?Translational andrology and urology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial randomized men to usual care or annual prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for 6 yr and digital rectal examination for 4 yr. This trial found no difference between the intervention and usual care arms of the study in the primary end point of prostate cancer (PCa)-specific mortality. The PLCO trial results have had a major impact on health policy and the rate of PSA screening in the United States. We analyzed the 13-yr screening and outcomes data from the 151 participants who died of PCa in the screening arm of the trial to better understand how randomization to screening failed to prevent PCa death in these men. We found that of these men, 81 (53.6%) either were never screened as part of the trial or had an initial positive screen. Only 17 (11.3%) of those who died reached year 6 of the trial with a PSA <4.0 ng/ml. The men who died in the screening arm were also older at study entry than the average PLCO participant (66 vs 62 yr; p < 0.001). Our analysis should inform the interpretation of the PLCO trial and provide insight into future trial design.
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.