ArticleCancer medicine2020
Assessment of harms, benefits, and cost-effectiveness of prostate cancer screening: A micro-simulation study of 230 scenarios.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Review on the Cost Effectiveness of Prostate Cancer Screening in Europe.European urology · 2024Pooled it
- 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
- Present status of prostate cancer diagnosis, limitations, challenges, and future endeavors.Annals of medicine · 2026Review
- Predicting clinically significant prostate cancer with or without digital rectal exam and MRI data using ClarityDX Prostate models.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- A Low-Cost, Portable, Multi-Cancer Screening Device Based on a Ratio Fluorometry and Signal Correlation Technique.Biosensors · 2024Article
- Development of an effective predictive screening tool for prostate cancer using the ClarityDX machine learning platform.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- Exploring the relation of active surveillance schedules and prostate cancer mortality.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Clinical and prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging findings as predictors of general and clinically significant prostate cancer risk: A retrospective single-center study.Current urology · 2023Article
- Article
- Screening for prostate cancer: evidence, ongoing trials, policies and knowledge gaps.BMJ oncology · 2023Review
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Stockholm 3 Testing Compared to PSA as the Primary Blood Test in the Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Pathway: A Decision Tree Approach.Applied health economics and health policy · 2022Article
- Serum PSA-based early detection of prostate cancer in Europe and globally: past, present and future.Nature reviews. Urology · 2022Review
- High-burden Cancers in Middle-income Countries: A Review of Prevention and Early Detection Strategies Targeting At-risk Populations.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2021Review
- Development and Validation of an Interpretable Artificial Intelligence Model to Predict 10-Year Prostate Cancer Mortality.Cancers · 2021Article
- Cost-effectiveness of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and MRI-guided biopsy in a population-based prostate cancer screening setting using a micro-simulation model.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
- The comparative effectiveness of mpMRI and MRI-guided biopsy vs regular biopsy in a population-based PSA testing: a modeling study.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Assessment of harms, benefits, and cost-effectiveness of prostate cancer screening: A micro-simulation study of 230 scenarios.Cancer medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer screening incurs a high risk of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. An organized and age-targeted screening strategy may reduce the associated harms while retaining or enhancing the benefits.
methodsUsing a micro-simulation analysis (MISCAN) model, we assessed the harms, benefits, and cost-effectiveness of 230 prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening strategies in a Dutch population. Screening strategies were varied by screening start age (50, 51, 52, 53, 54, and 55), stop age (51-69), and intervals (1, 2, 3, 4, 8, and single test). Costs and effects of each screening strategy were compared with a no-screening scenario.
resultsThe most optimum strategy would be screening with 3-year intervals at ages 55-64 resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €19 733 per QALY. This strategy predicted a 27% prostate cancer mortality reduction and 28 life years gained (LYG) per 1000 men; 36% of screen-detected men were overdiagnosed. Sensitivity analyses did not substantially alter the optimal screening strategy.
conclusionsPSA screening beyond age 64 is not cost-effective and associated with a higher risk of overdiagnosis. Similarly, starting screening before age 55 is not a favored strategy based on our cost-effectiveness analysis.
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.