ArticleCancer2018
The efficacy of prostate-specific antigen screening: Impact of key components in the ERSPC and PLCO trials.
Article in Cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 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
44 citing papers in PubMed, 69 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing the effectiveness of prostate cancer screening protocols: European Association of Urology- and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer-based strategies.International journal of cancer · 2026Trial
- Prostate cancer incidence in men with prostate-specific antigen below 3 ng/mL: The Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.International journal of cancer · 2023Trial
- Results from 22 years of Followup in the Göteborg Randomized Population-Based Prostate Cancer Screening Trial.The Journal of urology · 2022Trial
- Prostate-specific antigen testing and opportunistic prostate cancer screening: a cohort study in England, 1998-2017.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021Trial
- A 16-yr Follow-up of the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.European urology · 2019Trial
- Comparison of the Swedish and Finnish Centers in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).European urology open science · 2026Article
- Clinical value of emerging peripheral blood protein biomarkers in prostate cancer (Review).Oncology letters · 2026Review
- Risk factors for low-risk prostate cancer: A retrospective cohort study within the FinRSPC trial.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Transcriptome-wide association analysis identifies candidate susceptibility genes for prostate-specific antigen levels in men without prostate cancer.HGG advances · 2024Article
- Lifetime Health and Economic Outcomes of Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging as First-Line Screening for Prostate Cancer : A Decision Model Analysis.Annals of internal medicine · 2024Article
- Exploring the relation of active surveillance schedules and prostate cancer mortality.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Racial disparities in prostate cancer mortality: a model-based decomposition of contributing factors.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2023Article
- Prostate cancer screening-stepping forward with MRI.European radiology · 2023Article
- Transcriptome-Wide Association Analysis Identifies Novel Candidate Susceptibility Genes for Prostate-Specific Antigen Levels in Men Without Prostate Cancer.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023Article
- Serum PSA-based early detection of prostate cancer in Europe and globally: past, present and future.Nature reviews. Urology · 2022Review
- Evaluation of Prostate Cancer Screening Strategies in a Low-Resource, High-risk Population in the Bahamas.JAMA health forum · 2022Article
- Assessment of factors associated with PSA level in prostate cancer cases and controls from three geographical regions.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Impact of cancer screening on metastasis: A prostate cancer case study.Journal of medical screening · 2021Article
- Radiolabeled Bombesin Analogs.Cancers · 2021Review
- Clarifying the Trade-Offs of Risk-Stratified Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Study.American journal of epidemiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors at 14 institutions in 9 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) demonstrated that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening significantly reduced prostate cancer mortality (rate ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.91). The US Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) trial indicated no such reduction but had a wide 95% CI (rate ratio for prostate cancer mortality, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.87-1.36). Standard meta-analyses are unable to account for key differences between the trials that can impact the estimated effects of screening and the trials' point estimates.
methodsThe authors calibrated 2 microsimulation models to individual-level incidence and mortality data from 238,936 men participating in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. A cure parameter for the underlying efficacy of screening was estimated by the models separately for each trial. The authors changed step-by-step major known differences in trial settings, including enrollment and attendance patterns, screening intervals, PSA thresholds, biopsy receipt, control arm contamination, and primary treatment, to reflect a more ideal protocol situation and differences between the trials.
resultsUsing the cure parameter estimated for the ERSPC, the models projected 19% to 21% and 6% to 8%, respectively, prostate cancer mortality reductions in the ERSPC and PLCO settings. Using this cure parameter, the models projected a reduction of 37% to 43% under annual screening with 100% attendance and biopsy compliance and no contamination. The cure parameter estimated for the PLCO trial was 0.
conclusionsThe observed cancer mortality reduction in screening trials appears to be highly sensitive to trial protocol and practice settings. Accounting for these differences, the efficacy of PSA screening in the PLCO setting is not necessarily inconsistent with ERSPC results. Cancer 2018;124:1197-206. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
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.