Randomized trials on prostate cancer screening are limited by logistical and temporal issues. Modeling can be useful to estimate the results for alternative scenarios not examined in the studies and to explain sources of variation between trials.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Andriole, G. L. et al. Prostate cancer screening in the Randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial: mortality results after 13 years of follow-up. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 104, 125–132 (2012).
Schroder, F. H. et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N. Engl. J. Med. 360, 1320–1328 (2009).
Hugosson, J. et al. Mortality results from the Goteborg randomised population-based prostate-cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncol. 11, 725–732 (2010).
Wu, G. H. et al. The impact of interscreening interval and age on prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen. Eur. Urol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.01.008 (2012).
Pinsky, P. F. et al. Prostate biopsy following a positive screen in the prostate, lung, colorectal and ovarian cancer screening trial. J. Urol. 173, 746–751 (2005).
Schroder, F. H. & Roobol, M. J. ERSPC and PLCO prostate cancer screening studies: what are the differences? Eur. Urol. 58, 46–52 (2010).
American Cancer Society. Recommendations for prostate cancer early detection [online], (2011).
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology [online], (2011).
Finne, P. et al. The Finnish trial of prostate cancer screening: where are we now? BJU Int. 92 (Suppl. 2), 22–26 (2003).
Braithwaite, R. S., Fiellin, D. & Justice, A. C. The payoff time: a flexible framework to help clinicians decide when patients with comorbid disease are not likely to benefit from practice guidelines. Med. Care 47, 610–617 (2009).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Loeb, S., Carlsson, S. & Braithwaite, R. Modeling the outcomes of prostate cancer screening. Nat Rev Urol 9, 183–185 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2012.34
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2012.34
