Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 14 September 2010
- Vol. 341 (sep14 1) , c4543
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c4543
Abstract
Objective To examine the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for prostate cancer. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources Electronic databases including Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, abstract proceedings, and reference lists up to July 2010. Review methods Included studies were randomised controlled trials comparing screening by prostate specific antigen with or without digital rectal examination versus no screening. Data abstraction and assessment of methodological quality with the GRADE approach was assessed by two independent reviewers and verified by the primary investigator. Mantel-Haenszel and inverse variance estimates were calculated and pooled under a random effects model expressing data as relative risks and 95% confidence intervals. Results Six randomised controlled trials with a total of 387 286 participants that met inclusion criteria were analysed. Screening was associated with an increased probability of receiving a diagnosis of prostate cancer (relative risk 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.77; PConclusions The existing evidence from randomised controlled trials does not support the routine use of screening for prostate cancer with prostate specific antigen with or without digital rectal examination.This publication has 46 references indexed in Scilit:
- Prostate Cancer: Current Evidence Weighs Against Population ScreeningCA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 2009
- Screening for Prostate Cancer — The Controversy That Refuses to DieNew England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Mortality Results from a Randomized Prostate-Cancer Screening TrialNew England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Screening and Prostate-Cancer Mortality in a Randomized European StudyNew England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Lead Time and Overdiagnosis in Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening: Importance of Methods and ContextJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2009
- The Prostate cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial:VA/NCI/AHRQ Cooperative Studies Program #407 (PIVOT): Design and baseline results of a randomized controlled trial comparing radical prostatectomy to watchful waiting for men with clinically localized prostate cancerContemporary Clinical Trials, 2008
- What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians?BMJ, 2008
- Clinical Consequences of Screening for Prostate Cancer: 15 Years Follow-up of a Randomised Controlled Trial in SwedenEuropean Urology, 2004