Benefits and harms of prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer: An evidence update for the US preventive services task force

被引:193
|
作者
Lin, Kenneth [1 ]
Lipsitz, Robert [1 ]
Miller, Therese [1 ]
Janakiraman, Supriya [1 ]
机构
[1] Agcy Healthcare Res & Qual, Ctr Primary Care Prevent & Clin Partnerships, Rockville, MD 20850 USA
关键词
D O I
10.7326/0003-4819-149-3-200808050-00009
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Prostate cancer is the most common nonskin cancer in men in the United States, and prostate cancer screening has increased in recent years. In 2002, the U. S. Preventive Services Task Force concluded that evidence was insufficient to recommend for or against screening for prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. Purpose: To examine new evidence on benefits and harms of screening asymptomatic men for prostate cancer with PSA. Data Sources: English-language articles identified in PubMed and the Cochrane Library (search dates, January 2002 to July 2007), reference lists of retrieved articles, and expert suggestions. Study Selection: Randomized, controlled trials and meta-analyses of PSA screening and cross-sectional and cohort studies of screening harms and of the natural history of screening-detected cancer were selected to answer the following questions: Does screening for prostate cancer with PSA, as a single-threshold test or as a function of multiple tests over time, decrease morbidity or mortality? What are the magnitude and nature of harms associated with prostate cancer screening, other than overtreatment? What is the natural history of PSA-detected, nonpalpable, localized prostate cancer? Data Extraction: Studies were reviewed, abstracted, and rated for quality by using predefined U. S. Preventive Services Task Force criteria. Data Synthesis: No good-quality randomized, controlled trials of screening for prostate cancer have been completed. In 1 cross-sectional and 2 prospective cohort studies of fair to good quality, false-positive PSA screening results caused psychological adverse effects for up to 1 year after the test. The natural history of PSA-detected prostate cancer is poorly understood. Limitations: Few eligible studies were identified. Long-term adverse effects of false-positive PSA screening test results are unknown. Conclusion: Prostate-specific antigen screening is associated with psychological harms, and its potential benefits remain uncertain.
引用
收藏
页码:192 / 199
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Screening for prostate cancer: An update of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force
    Harris, R
    Lohr, KN
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2002, 137 (11) : 917 - 929
  • [2] Prostate-Specific Antigen-Based Screening for Prostate Cancer Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force
    Fenton, Joshua J.
    Weyrich, Meghan S.
    Durbin, Shauna
    Liu, Yu
    Bang, Heejung
    Melnikow, Joy
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2018, 319 (18): : 1914 - 1931
  • [3] Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening After 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations
    Sammon, Jesse D.
    Abdollah, Firas
    Choueiri, Toni K.
    Kantoff, PhilipW.
    Nguyen, Paul L.
    Menon, Mani
    Quoc-Dien Trinh
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2015, 314 (19): : 2075 - 2077
  • [4] Changes in Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing Relative to the Revised US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation on Prostate Cancer Screening
    Leapman, Michael S.
    Wang, Rong
    Park, Henry
    Yu, James B.
    Sprenkle, Preston C.
    Cooperberg, Matthew R.
    Gross, Cary P.
    Ma, Xiaomei
    [J]. JAMA ONCOLOGY, 2022, 8 (01) : 41 - 47
  • [5] Re: Changes in Prostate-specific Antigen Testing Relative to the Revised US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation on Prostate Cancer Screening
    Fleshner, Katherine
    Carlsson, Sigrid V.
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2022, 81 (03) : 313 - 313
  • [6] Re: Changes in Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing Relative to the Revised US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation on Prostate Cancer Screening
    Agochukwu-Mmonu, N.
    Qi, J.
    Dunn, R. L.
    Montie, J.
    Wittmann, D.
    Miller, D.
    Martin, R.
    Kim, T.
    Johnston, W. K., III
    Peabody, J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2022, 207 (04): : 928 - 929
  • [7] Trends in Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening and Prostate Cancer Interventions 3 Years After the US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation
    Ong, Mei-Sing
    Mandl, Kenneth D.
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2017, 166 (06) : 451 - +
  • [8] Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Review of the Evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force
    Chou, Roger
    Croswell, Jennifer M.
    Dana, Tracy
    Bougatsos, Christina
    Blazina, Ian
    Fu, Rongwei
    Gleitsmann, Ken
    Koenig, Helen C.
    Lam, Clarence
    Maltz, Ashley
    Rugge, J. Bruin
    Lin, Kenneth
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2011, 155 (11) : 762 - U94
  • [9] Trends in Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening Since the Implementation of the 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations
    Rahbar, Haider
    Karabon, Patrick
    Menon, Mani
    Quoc-Dien Trinh
    Abdollah, Firas
    Catto, James
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS, 2018, 4 (06): : 1002 - 1004
  • [10] National Prostate Cancer Screening Rates After the 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Discouraging Prostate-Specific Antigen-Based Screening
    Drazer, Michael W.
    Huo, Dezheng
    Eggener, Scott E.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2015, 33 (22) : 2416 - U18