Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31820217›Full record

Observational studyJournal of general internal medicine2020

Changes in Prostate Cancer Presentation Following the 2012 USPSTF Screening Statement: Observational Study in a Multispecialty Group Practice.

Joseph Presti, Stacey Alexeeff, Brandon Horton, Stephanie Prausnitz, Andrew L Avins

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of general internal medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06009549 (Engagement Trends in Clinical Trials for Metastatic Prostate Cancer - A Journey Into Participation Patterns Among Individuals Affected by the Condition), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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.

NCT06009549 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Engagement Trends in Clinical Trials for Metastatic Prostate Cancer - A Journey Into Participation Patterns Among Individuals Affected by the Condition

TypeobservationalSponsorPower Life Sciences Inc.Ran2024 to 2026Enrolled500ConditionsMetastatic Prostate Cancer
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Cancer Screening Clinical Trial: Evidence and Endpoint.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. PSA Screening: a Kind of Russian Roulette?Journal of general internal medicine · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Joseph PrestiDepartment of Urology, Kaiser Oakland, 3600 Broadway, Suite 40, Oakland, CA, 94611, USA. Joseph.c.presti@kp.org.
Stacey AlexeeffDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA.
Brandon HortonDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA.
Stephanie PrausnitzDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA.
Andrew L AvinsDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA.
Kaiser Permanente · USKaiser Permanente Oakland Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2012, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended against PSA-based screening for prostate cancer in men of all ages. Following this change, screening declined yet the complete impact on clinical presentation is not well defined in the screen-eligible population.

objectiveTo determine if the rates of PSA screening, prostate biopsy, incident prostate cancer detection, and stage IV at presentation in screen-eligible men in Kaiser Permanente Northern California changed following the 2012 USPSTF Prostate Cancer Screening recommendations.

designRetrospective study spanning the years 2010 to 2015, in screen-eligible Kaiser Permanente Northern California members (African American men ages 45-69 and all other men ages 50-69) with no prior history of prostate cancer. Participants All screen-eligible, male members during 2010 (n = 403,931) to 2015 (n = 483,286) without a history of prostate cancer within all Kaiser Permanente Northern California facilities. MAIN MEASURES: Annual rates of PSA testing, prostate biopsy, incident prostate cancer detection, and stage IV cancer at presentation were compared between the pre-guideline period, 2010 and 2011, and the post-guideline period, 2014 and 2015, in men under the age of 70. KEY

resultsFollowing the 2012 USPSTF guideline change, screening rates declined 23.4% (95% CI 23.0-23.8%), biopsy rates declined 64.3% (95% CI 62.9-65.6%), and incident prostate cancer detection rates declined 53.5% (95% CI 50.1-56.7%) resulting in 1871 fewer incident cancers detected, and metastatic cancer rates increased 36.9% (95% CI 9.5-71.0%) resulting in 75 more stage IV cancers detected.

conclusionLess screening resulted in a large decrease in cancer detection, some of which may be beneficial as many cancers may be indolent, yet this decrease occurred at the expense of an increase in metastatic cancer rates. For every 25 fewer cancers detected, one metastatic cancer was diagnosed. This information may be valuable in the shared decision-making process around prostate cancer screening.

Indexed as

Group PracticeProstatic NeoplasmsAgedAge FactorsEarly Detection of CancerHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedProstate-Specific AntigenRetrospective StudiesProstate-Specific Antigencancer screeningprostate cancershared decision-making

Identifiers

PMID31820217
PMCPMC7210336
OpenAlexW2991985179

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.