ArticleEuropean urology open science2026
Comparison of the Swedish and Finnish Centers in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).
Article in European urology open science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer showed 20% reduction in prostate cancer (PC) mortality after 16 year follow-up of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) based screening, but effects varied: 9% in Finland (FinRSPC) vs 37% in Sweden (Göteborg-1) in screening vs control groups. The objective was to explore this difference. Methods: The data comprised 64 774 participants in FinRSPC and 10 703 men in Göteborg-1, aged 55-63 year at randomization (FinRSPC: 1996-1999; Göteborg-1: 1995). Screening invitations were issued for PSA testing every 4 year, with biopsy recommended if PSA ≥4 ng/ml, or 3-3.99 ng/ml with an additional test in FinRSPC; and every 2 year, with biopsy recommended at PSA ≥3 ng/ml in Göteborg-1. Expected incidence/mortality was based on registry data (1990-1994, and 2010-2014). Outcomes included cumulative PC incidence, PC-specific mortality, and relative risks. Key findings and limitations: In Göteborg-1, PC incidence was 44% higher (95% CI [confidence interval]: 29-61) and PC mortality 36% lower (95% CI: 7-56) in screening vs control groups. In FinRSPC, PC incidence was 21% higher (95% CI: 15-27) and PC mortality 2% lower (95% CI: -19-19). Screening groups in both centers had approximately 40% lower mortality than expected with 1990-1994 rates, similar to 2010-2014 rates. Swedish controls resembled expected rates in 1990-1994 and Finnish controls in 2010-2014. A key limitation was the exploratory nature of the study. Conclusions and clinical implications: The lower effect on PC mortality in FinRSPC appears attributable to unexpectedly low mortality in the control group, possibly due to extensive contamination from the start of the study. Findings highlight the challenges in demonstrating mortality benefit in screening trials under widespread opportunistic testing.
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.