Estimating the rate of overdiagnosis with prostate cancer screening: evidence from the Finnish component of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer

被引:13
作者
Walter, S. D. [1 ]
Hu, Jiarui [2 ]
Talala, Kirsi [3 ]
Tammela, Teuvo [4 ,5 ]
Taari, Kimmo [6 ]
Auvinen, Anssi [7 ]
机构
[1] McMaster Univ, Dept Hlth Res Methodol Evidence & Impact, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8, Canada
[2] McMaster Univ, Dept Math & Stat, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[3] Finnish Canc Registry, Helsinki, Finland
[4] Tampere Univ, Fac Med & Hlth Technol, Tampere, Finland
[5] Tampere Univ, Tampere Univ Hosp, Tampere, Finland
[6] Univ Helsinki, Helsinki Univ Hosp, Dept Urol, Helsinki, Finland
[7] Tampere Univ, Fac Social Sci, Tampere, Finland
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会; 芬兰科学院;
关键词
Prostate cancer; Screening; PSA; Randomized trial; Over-diagnosis; Mortality; ESTIMATING LEAD-TIME; MORTALITY; OVERDETECTION; BREAST; STAGE;
D O I
10.1007/s10552-021-01480-8
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose Screening for prostate cancer may have limited impact on decreasing prostate cancer-related mortality. A major disadvantage is overdiagnosis, whereby lesions are identified that would not have become evident during the man's lifetime if screening had not taken place. The present study aims to estimate the rate of overdiagnosis using Finnish data from the European randomized trial of prostate cancer screening. Methods We used data from 80,149 men randomized to a screening or a control group, distinguishing four birth cohorts. We used the "catch-up method" to identify when the difference in the cumulative incidence of prostate cancer between the screening and control groups had stabilized, implying that the screening has no further effect. We define the overdiagnosis rate to be the relative excess cumulative incidence in the screened group at that point. As an independent method, we also examined the diagnosis rates of T1c tumors as an indicator of early tumors detected by PSA. Results The estimates of overdiagnosis rates from the catch-up method using the full period of available follow-up ranged between cohorts from 2.3% to 15.4%, and the T1c analysis gave very similar results. Conclusion Some overdiagnosis has occurred, but there is uncertainty about its extent. A long follow-up is required to demonstrate the full impact of screening. We evaluated the overdiagnosis rates at a population level, associated with being offered screening, taking account of contamination (screening among the controls). The overall evaluation of screening should incorporate mortality benefit, cost-effectiveness, and quality of life.
引用
收藏
页码:1299 / 1313
页数:15
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]  
American Cancer Society, 2018, CANC FACTS FIGURES 2
[2]   Mortality Results from a Randomized Prostate-Cancer Screening Trial [J].
Andriole, Gerald L. ;
Grubb, Robert L., III ;
Buys, Saundra S. ;
Chia, David ;
Church, Timothy R. ;
Fouad, Mona N. ;
Gelmann, Edward P. ;
Kvale, Paul A. ;
Reding, Douglas J. ;
Weissfeld, Joel L. ;
Yokochi, Lance A. ;
Crawford, E. David ;
O'Brien, Barbara ;
Clapp, Jonathan D. ;
Rathmell, Joshua M. ;
Riley, Thomas L. ;
Hayes, Richard B. ;
Kramer, Barnett S. ;
Izmirlian, Grant ;
Miller, Anthony B. ;
Pinsky, Paul F. ;
Prorok, Philip C. ;
Gohagan, John K. ;
Berg, Christine D. .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2009, 360 (13) :1310-1319
[3]   Lead-time in prostate cancer screening (Finland) [J].
Auvinen, A ;
Määttänen, L ;
Stenman, UH ;
Tammela, T ;
Rannikko, S ;
Aro, J ;
Juusela, H ;
Hakama, M .
CANCER CAUSES & CONTROL, 2002, 13 (03) :279-285
[4]   Prevalence of incidental prostate cancer: A systematic review of autopsy studies [J].
Bell, Katy J. L. ;
Del Mar, Chris ;
Wright, Gordon ;
Dickinson, James ;
Glasziou, Paul .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2015, 137 (07) :1749-1757
[5]   Effects of study methods and biases on estimates of invasive breast cancer overdetection with mammography screening: a systematic review [J].
Biesheuvel, Corne ;
Barratt, Alexandra ;
Howard, Kirsten ;
Houssami, Nehmat ;
Irwig, Les .
LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2007, 8 (12) :1129-1138
[6]   Determining overdiagnosis by screening with DRE/TRUS or PSA (Florence pilot studies, 1991-1994) [J].
Ciatto, S ;
Gervasi, G ;
Bonardi, R ;
Frullini, P ;
Zendron, P ;
Lombardi, C ;
Crocetti, E ;
Zappa, M .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2005, 41 (03) :411-415
[7]   Contamination by opportunistic screening in the European Randomized Study of Prostate Cancer Screening [J].
Ciatto, S ;
Zappa, M ;
Villers, A ;
Paez, A ;
Otto, S ;
Auvinen, A .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2003, 92 :97-100
[8]   Recent Global Patterns in Prostate Cancer Incidence and Mortality Rates [J].
Culp, MaryBeth B. ;
Soerjomataram, Isabelle ;
Efstathiou, Jason A. ;
Bray, Freddie ;
Jemal, Ahmedin .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2020, 77 (01) :38-52
[9]   MISCAN: estimating lead-time and over-detection by simulation [J].
Draisma, G ;
De Koning, HJ .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2003, 92 :106-111
[10]   Lead Time and Overdiagnosis in Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening: Importance of Methods and Context [J].
Draisma, Gerrit ;
Etzioni, Ruth ;
Tsodikov, Alex ;
Mariotto, Angela ;
Wever, Elisabeth ;
Gulati, Roman ;
Feuer, Eric ;
de Koning, Harry .
JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2009, 101 (06) :374-383