ArticleJournal of medical screening2022
Multi-marker risk-based screening for prostate cancer.
Article in Journal of medical screening, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review on the Cost Effectiveness of Prostate Cancer Screening in Europe.European urology · 2024Pooled it
- Screening for prostate cancer.Journal of medical screening · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine prostate cancer screening performance using prostate specific antigen (PSA) along with other markers, expressing markers in age-specific multiples of the median (MoM), and age.
methodsA prospective nested case-control study used stored serum from 571 men who died of, or with history of, prostate cancer (cases), and 2169 matched controls. Total, free and intact PSA, human kallikrein-related peptidase 2 (hK2), and microseminoprotein were measured and converted into MoM values. Screening marker distribution parameters were estimated in cases and controls. Monte Carlo simulation used these in a risk-based algorithm to estimate screening performance (detection rates [DRs] and false-positive rates [FPRs]).
resultsAlmost all (99%) cases occurred aged ≥55. Marker values were similar in cases who did and did not die of prostate cancer. Combining age, total PSA and hK2 MoM values (other markers added little or no discrimination) yielded a 1.2% FPR (95% CI 0.2-4.8%) for a 90% DR (59-98%) in men who died of or with a prostate cancer diagnosis within 5 years of blood collection (risk cut-off 1 in 20), two-thirds less than the 4.5% FPR using total PSA alone measured in ng/ml for the same 90% DR (cut-off 3.1 ng/ml). Screening performance over 10 years yielded a 33% (22-46%) FPR for a 90% DR.
conclusionScreening performed up to every 5 years from age 55 using the multi-marker risk-based screening algorithm for future prostate cancer achieves a high DR and a much lower FPR than using PSA alone, resulting in reductions in overdiagnosis and overtreatment.
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.