Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30288918›Full record

Trial reportBJU international2019

Extended follow-up for prostate cancer incidence and mortality among participants in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian randomized cancer screening trial.

Paul F Pinsky, Eric Miller, Philip Prorok, Robert Grubb, E David Crawford, Gerald Andriole

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

Trial report in BJU international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

60 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Late-Stage Outcomes as Surrogates for Mortality in Cancer Screening Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Paul F PinskyDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0350-3282
Eric MillerDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1946-1048
Philip ProrokDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Robert GrubbMedical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
E David CrawfordUniversity of Colorado Health Sciences, Denver, CO, USA.
Gerald AndrioleWashington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.

Funding

NCI National Clinical Trials Network - Lead Academic Participating SiteUG1CA233324 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI ANTHONY D ELIAS · 2019 to 2026
$5.2M
University of Colorado NTCN Lead Academic Participating Site (LAPS) U10CA180834 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI ELIAS, ANTHONY D · 2014 to 2018
$3.8M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180834NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA233324
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine prostate cancer (PCa) incidence and mortality by arm in the randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial. PATIENTS AND

methodsPatients aged 55-74 years at 10 screening centres were randomized between 1993 and 2001 to an intervention or usual care arm. Patients in the intervention arm received six annual prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests and four annual digital rectal examinations. The patients were followed for PCa incidence and for mortality via active follow-up processes and by linkage to state cancer registries and the National Death Index. For cancers identified through active follow-up, trial abstractors recorded the mode of diagnosis (screen-detected, symptomatic, other).

resultsA total of 38 340 patients were randomized to the intervention arm and 38 343 to a usual care arm. The median follow-up for mortality was 16.9 (intervention) and 16.7 years (usual care). There were 333 (intervention) and 352 (usual care) PCa cancer deaths, giving rates (per 10 000 person-years) of 5.5 and 5.9, respectively, and a rate ratio (RR) of 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-1.08; P = 0.38). The RR for overall PCa incidence was 1.05 (95% CI 1.01-1.09). The RRs by Gleason category were 1.17 (95% CI 1.11-1.23) for Gleason 2-6, 1.00 (95% CI 0.93-1.07) for Gleason 7 and 0.89 (95% CI 0.80-0.99) for Gleason 8-10 disease. By mode of detection, during the trial's screening phase, 13% of intervention arm vs 27% of usual care arm cases were symptomatic; post-screening, these percentages were 18% in each arm.

conclusionAfter almost 17 years of median follow-up, there was no significant reduction in PCa mortality in the intervention compared with the usual care arm. There was a significant increase in Gleason 2-6 disease and a significant reduction in Gleason 8-10 disease in the intervention compared with the usual care arm.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningAgedBiomarkers, TumorDigital Rectal ExaminationEarly Detection of CancerFollow-Up StudiesHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorProstate-Specific Antigen#PCSM#ProstateCancerprostate-specific antigenscreening#uroonc

Identifiers

PMID30288918
PMCPMC6450783

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.