Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41432210›Full record

ReviewJournal of primary care & community health

An Evidenced Based Review and Common-Sense Approach to Prostate Cancer Screening for Primary Care Physicians, in an Era of Conflicting Guideline Recommendations and Debate.

Mahnoor Ashraf, Mouneeb Choudry, Daniel Frendl, Gregory M Garrison, Chris Stephenson, Nathaniel Miller, Jack R Andrews

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of primary care & community health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Prostate Screening.Journal of primary care & community health
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Mahnoor AshrafMayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Mouneeb ChoudryMayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Daniel FrendlMayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Gregory M GarrisonMayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6903-4610
Chris StephensonMayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Nathaniel MillerMayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4646-1748
Jack R AndrewsMayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening has played a critical role in reducing prostate cancer mortality but remains controversial due to concerns regarding overdiagnosis, overtreatment, and inconsistent screening guidelines. In 2012, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) issued a grade D recommendation against PSA screening, leading to a national decline in PSA testing and prostate biopsy rates. This was followed by an increase in the incidence of metastatic prostate cancer at diagnosis. The USPSTF has since revised its recommendation to grade C, emphasizing shared decision-making for men aged 55 to 69 years. However, variability in screening recommendations across professional societies has resulted in clinical uncertainty, particularly for primary care physicians (PCPs), who frequently initiate PSA testing and urology referrals. This review provides an evidence-based overview of PSA screening tailored for the PCP. We performed a comprehensive literature review using Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, including systematic reviews published between January 2020 and April 2025, and current guidelines from the American Urological Association (AUA), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), European Association of Urology (EAU), and American Cancer Society (ACS). We summarize the evolving landscape of PSA screening and its integration with contemporary tools such as shared decision-making, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), and transperineally targeted biopsy. We advocate for initiating PSA screening between the ages of 45 and 49 in men with average or elevated risk, based on long-term evidence demonstrating the value of an early baseline PSA level and risk-stratified follow-up. This approach, coupled with improved diagnostic tools, can help PCPs navigate guideline variability and implement a rational, common-sense strategy to maximize early detection while minimizing harm.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerPhysicians, Primary CarePractice Guidelines as TopicProstatic NeoplasmsAgedHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedProstate-Specific AntigenUnited StatesProstate-Specific Antigendisease managementprimary careprostate cancerprostate-specific antigenurology

Identifiers

PMID41432210
PMCPMC12743156

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.