Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38751945›Full record

ReviewBJUI compass2024

Variation in harms and benefits of prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer by socio-clinical risk factors: A rapid review.

Abel Tesfai, Natalia Norori, Thomas A Harding, Yui Hang Wong, Matthew David Hobbs

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BJUI compass, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Beyond Total PSA: Clinical Significance of S2,3PSA% in Reducing Unnecessary Prostate Biopsies.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Erratum.BJUI compass · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Abel TesfaiProstate Cancer UK London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2209-5808
Natalia NororiProstate Cancer UK London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6611-118X
Thomas A HardingProstate Cancer UK London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-0973-0302
Yui Hang WongProstate Cancer UK London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4464-0547
Matthew David HobbsProstate Cancer UK London UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To analyse the latest evidence on the relative harms and benefits of screening and diagnostic pathways with close examination of (i) men aged 50 years or older, (ii) men whose ethnicity places them at higher risk and (iii) men with a family history. Methods: We conducted a literature search using PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases and other sources, from January 1990 to 25 January 2023. Two independent reviewers selected for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies which met our inclusion criteria. Results: Twenty-eight articles were selected, from six trials, including the Göteborg trial-reported separately from European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). Prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening led to the increased detection of low-grade cancer and reduction of advanced/metastatic disease but had contradictory effects on prostate cancer (PCa)-specific mortality (no difference or reduced), possibly due to issues of contamination or compliance. Screening men from a relatively young age (50-55) reduced risk of PCa-specific mortality in a subanalysis of an 18-year follow-up study and in a 17-year cohort study from the main Göteborg trial. Moreover, one Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial analysis reported a trend of reduced risk of PCa-specific mortality for men with a family history who were screened. [Correction added on 05 March 2024, after first online publication: "Cancer Screening Trial" has been added to the preceding sentence.] However, we did not find relevant studies for ethnicity. Conclusion: Under current UK practice, the choice to conduct a PSA test relies on a shared decision-making approach guided by known risk factors. However, we found there was a lack of strong evidence on the harms and benefits of PSA screening by socio-clinical risk factors and suggest further research is required to understand the long-term impact of screening on high-risk populations in the current diagnostic setting.

Indexed as

ageethnicityfamily historymortalityoverdiagnosisrisk factorsscreening

Identifiers

PMID38751945
PMCPMC11090766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.