ArticleCancer epidemiology2019
Variations in prostate biopsy recommendation and acceptance confound evaluation of risk factors for prostate cancer: Examining race and BMI.
Article in Cancer epidemiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differential Biopsy Patterns Influence Associations between Multivitamin Use and Prostate Cancer Risk in the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022Trial
- Serum markers, obesity and prostate cancer risk: results from the prostate cancer prevention trial.Endocrine-related cancer · 2022Trial
- Role of NOncology reports · 2024Review
- Obesity and prostate cancer screening, incidence, and mortality in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023Article
- Platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio and systemic immune-inflammation index versus circulating prostate cells to predict significant prostate cancer at first biopsy.Turkish journal of urology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer is ubiquitous in older men; differential screening patterns and variations in biopsy recommendations and acceptance will affect which man is diagnosed and, therefore, evaluation of cancer risk factors. We describe a statistical method to reduce prostate cancer detection bias among African American (n = 3398) and Non-Hispanic White men (n = 22,673) who participated in the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention trial (SELECT) and revisit a previously reported association between race, obesity and prostate cancer risk.
methodsFor men with screening values suggesting prostate cancer but in whom biopsy was not performed, the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator was used to estimate probability of prostate cancer. Associations of body mass index (BMI) and race with incident prostate cancer were compared for observed versus imputation-enhanced outcomes using incident density ratios.
resultsAccounting for differential biopsy assessment, the previously reported positive linear trend between BMI and prostate cancer in African American men was not observed; no BMI association was found among Non-Hispanic White men.
conclusionsDifferential disease classification among men who may be recommended to undergo and then consider whether to accept a prostate biopsy leads to inaccurate identification of prostate cancer risk factors. Imputing a man's prostate cancer status reduces detection bias. Covariate adjustment does not address the problem of outcome misclassification. Cohorts evaluating incident prostate cancer should collect longitudinal screening and biopsy data to adjust for this potential bias.
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.