Trial reportJAMA2024
Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening and 15-Year Prostate Cancer Mortality: A Secondary Analysis of the CAP Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
61 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Focal radiation therapies for localized prostate cancer: a systematic review of clinical evidence and outcomes.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Pooled it
- The Benefits and Harms of Screening for Prostate Cancer in Adults Aged 18 Years and Older: A Systematic Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Pooled it
- Strong association between reduction of late-stage cancers and reduction of cancer-specific mortality in meta-regression of randomized screening trials across multiple cancer types.Journal of medical screening · 2024Pooled it
- [Cancer prevention recommendations: Update 2024].Atencion primaria · 2024Guideline
- Cancer detection in the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).BJU international · 2026Trial
- Evaluating the Impact of Age on Prostate Cancer Overdiagnosis Using Long-Term Follow-Up From the CAP Randomised Trial.International journal of cancer · 2026Trial
- The Diagnostic Yield of Whole-Body MRI as a Multi-disease Screening Modality: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- European Cancer Prevention Organization on cancer screening: an expert panel position paper.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2026Article
- Plasmonic Nanoarray Biosensors for Non-Invasive Cancer Diagnostics.Biosensors · 2026Review
- Article
- The evolving role of PSA in prostate cancer screening: revisiting the evidence in the era of personalized medicine.Advances in laboratory medicine · 2026Review
- The Proposed Introduction of a Prostate Cancer Screening Program in Germany: Procedure, Necessary Studies before Implementation, Benefits, and Risks.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2026Review
- Prostate Cancer Screening in Contemporary Era: PSA-Based Testing and Risk-Adapted Approaches.Cancers · 2026Review
- Prostate cancer detection in routine clinical practice: a large cohort study in Japan.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The 5-year outcomes of a regional population-based PSA information and testing programme.BJU international · 2026Article
- Evaluating the basis for use of advanced stage as a surrogate endpoint for cancer mortality in screening trials: a simulation study of meta-correlation and an alternative framework.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Clinical and Liquid Biomarkers of 20-Year Prostate Cancer Risk in Men Aged 45 to 70 Years.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Genomic risk model to implement precision prostate cancer screening in clinical care: the ProGRESS study.Nature cancer · 2026Article
- Evaluating the impact of age on prostate cancer overdiagnosis using long-term follow-up from a randomised trial.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Effect of implementing population-based prostate-specific antigen screening on testing rates and prostate cancer overdiagnosis in England: a statistical modelling study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: The Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer (CAP) reported no effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer mortality at a median 10-year follow-up (primary outcome), but the long-term effects of PSA screening on prostate cancer mortality remain unclear. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a single invitation for PSA screening on prostate cancer-specific mortality at a median 15-year follow-up compared with no invitation for screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of the CAP randomized clinical trial included men aged 50 to 69 years identified at 573 primary care practices in England and Wales. Primary care practices were randomized between September 25, 2001, and August 24, 2007, and men were enrolled between January 8, 2002, and January 20, 2009. Follow-up was completed on March 31, 2021. Intervention: Men received a single invitation for a PSA screening test with subsequent diagnostic tests if the PSA level was 3.0 ng/mL or higher. The control group received standard practice (no invitation). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was reported previously. Of 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, results of 4 were reported previously. The 4 remaining prespecified secondary outcomes at 15-year follow-up were prostate cancer-specific mortality, all-cause mortality, and prostate cancer stage and Gleason grade at diagnosis. Results: Of 415 357 eligible men (mean [SD] age, 59.0 [5.6] years), 98% were included in these analyses. Overall, 12 013 and 12 958 men with a prostate cancer diagnosis were in the intervention and control groups, respectively (15-year cumulative risk, 7.08% [95% CI, 6.95%-7.21%] and 6.94% [95% CI, 6.82%-7.06%], respectively). At a median 15-year follow-up, 1199 men in the intervention group (0.69% [95% CI, 0.65%-0.73%]) and 1451 men in the control group (0.78% [95% CI, 0.73%-0.82%]) died of prostate cancer (rate ratio [RR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99]; P = .03). Compared with the control, the PSA screening intervention increased detection of low-grade (Gleason score [GS] ≤6: 2.2% vs 1.6%; P < .001) and localized (T1/T2: 3.6% vs 3.1%; P < .001) disease but not intermediate (GS of 7), high-grade (GS ≥8), locally advanced (T3), or distally advanced (T4/N1/M1) tumors. There were 45 084 all-cause deaths in the intervention group (23.2% [95% CI, 23.0%-23.4%]) and 50 336 deaths in the control group (23.3% [95% CI, 23.1%-23.5%]) (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.94-1.01]; P = .11). Eight of the prostate cancer deaths in the intervention group (0.7%) and 7 deaths in the control group (0.5%) were related to a diagnostic biopsy or prostate cancer treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, a single invitation for PSA screening compared with standard practice without routine screening reduced prostate cancer deaths at a median follow-up of 15 years. However, the absolute reduction in deaths was small. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN92187251.
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.