Lead Times and Overdetection Due to Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening: Estimates From the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 18 June 2003
- journal article
- clinical trial
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Vol. 95 (12), 868-878
- https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/95.12.868
Abstract
Background: Screening for prostate cancer advances the time of diagnosis (lead time) and detects cancers that would not have been diagnosed in the absence of screening (overdetection). Both consequences have considerable impact on the net benefits of screening. Methods: We developed simulation models based on results of the Rotterdam section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), which enrolled 42 376 men and in which 1498 cases of prostate cancer were identified, and on baseline prostate cancer incidence and stage distribution data. The models were used to predict mean lead times, overdetection rates, and ranges (corresponding to approximate 95% confidence intervals) associated with different screening programs. Results: Mean lead times and rates of overdetection depended on a man’s age at screening. For a single screening test at age 55, the estimated mean lead time was 12.3 years (range = 11.6–14.1 years) and the overdetection rate was 27% (range = 24%–37%); at age 75, the estimates were 6.0 years (range = 5.8–6.3 years) and 56% (range = 53%–61%), respectively. For a screening program with a 4-year screening interval from age 55 to 67, the estimated mean lead time was 11.2 years (range = 10.8–12.1 years), and the overdetection rate was 48% (range = 44%–55%). This screening program raised the lifetime risk of a prostate cancer diagnosis from 6.4% to 10.6%, a relative increase of 65% (range = 56%–87%). In annual screening from age 55 to 67, the estimated overdetection rate was 50% (range = 46%–57%) and the lifetime prostate cancer risk was increased by 80% (range = 69%–116%). Extending annual or quadrennial screening to the age of 75 would result in at least two cases of overdetection for every clinically relevant cancer detected. Conclusions: These model-based lead-time estimates support a prostate cancer screening interval of more than 1 year.Keywords
This publication has 35 references indexed in Scilit:
- Prostate cancer mortality reduction by screening: Power and time frame with complete enrollment in the European randomised screening for prostate cancer (ERSPC) trialInternational Journal of Cancer, 2001
- Large‐scale randomized prostate cancer screening trials: Program performances in the European randomized screening for prostate cancer trial and the prostate, lung, colorectal and ovary cancer trialInternational Journal of Cancer, 2001
- International trends in prostate-cancer mortality in the ?PSA era?International Journal of Cancer, 2001
- Pathological features of prostate cancer detected on initial and repeat prostate biopsy: Results of the prospective European prostate cancer detection studyThe Prostate, 2001
- Would prostate cancer detected by screening withprostate-specific antigen develop into clinical cancer if left undiagnosed? A comparison of two population-based studies in SwedenBJU International, 2000
- Evaluation of prostatic specific antigen and digital rectal examination as screening tests for prostate cancerThe Prostate, 2000
- Quantitative Interpretation of Age-Specific Mortality Reductions From the Swedish Breast Cancer-Screening TrialsJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1995
- Serum concentrations of prostate specific antigen and its complex with α1-antichymotrypsin before diagnosis of prostate cancerThe Lancet, 1994
- Mixed‐effects regression models for studying the natural history of prostate diseaseStatistics in Medicine, 1994
- Latent carcinoma of the prostateThe Journal of Pathology and Bacteriology, 1954