Skip to main content
Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology 3/2019

12.07.2018 | Original Article

Unintended consequences of decreased PSA-based prostate cancer screening

verfasst von: Thomas Ahlering, Linda My Huynh, Kamaljot S. Kaler, Stephen Williams, Kathryn Osann, Jean Joseph, David Lee, John W. Davis, Ronney Abaza, Jihad Kaouk, Vipul Patel, Isaac Yi Kim, James Porter, Jim C. Hu

Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology | Ausgabe 3/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

In May 2012, the US Preventive Services Task Force issued a grade D recommendation against PSA-based prostate cancer screening. Epidemiologists have concerns that an unintended consequence is a problematic increase in high-risk disease and subsequent prostate cancer-specific mortality.

Materials and methods

To assess the effect of decreased PSA screening on the presentation of high-risk prostate cancer post-radical prostatectomy (RP). Nine high-volume referral centers throughout the United States (n = 19,602) from October 2008 through September 2016 were assessed and absolute number of men presenting with GS ≥ 8, seminal vesicle and lymph node invasion were compared with propensity score matching.

Results

Compared to the 4-year average pre-(Oct. 2008–Sept. 2012) versus post-(Oct. 2012–Sept. 2016) recommendation, a 22.6% reduction in surgical volume and increases in median PSA (5.1–5.8 ng/mL) and mean age (60.8–62.0 years) were observed. The proportion of low-grade GS 3 + 3 cancers decreased significantly (30.2–17.1%) while high-grade GS 8 + cancers increased (8.4–13.5%). There was a 24% increase in absolute numbers of GS 8+ cancers. One-year biochemical recurrence rose from 6.2 to 17.5%. To discern whether increases in high-risk disease were due to referral patterns, propensity score matching was performed. Forest plots of odds ratios adjusted for age and PSA showed significant increases in pathologic stage, grade, and lymph node involvement.

Conclusions

All centers experienced consistent decreases of low-grade disease and absolute increases in intermediate and high-risk cancer. For any given age and PSA, propensity matching demonstrates more aggressive disease in the post-recommendation era.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat United States Preventive Services Task Force (2008) Screening for prostate cancer: US preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 149:185–191CrossRef United States Preventive Services Task Force (2008) Screening for prostate cancer: US preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 149:185–191CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Chou R, Croswell JM, Dana T et al (2011) Screening for prostate cancer: a review of the evidence for the US preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med 155:762–771CrossRefPubMed Chou R, Croswell JM, Dana T et al (2011) Screening for prostate cancer: a review of the evidence for the US preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med 155:762–771CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Lin K, Croswell JM, Koenig H, et al. Prostate-specific antigen-based screening for prostate cancer—an evidence updated for the US preventive services task force. Agency for healthcare research and quality. 2011; AHRQ Publication No. 12-05160-EF-1 Lin K, Croswell JM, Koenig H, et al. Prostate-specific antigen-based screening for prostate cancer—an evidence updated for the US preventive services task force. Agency for healthcare research and quality. 2011; AHRQ Publication No. 12-05160-EF-1
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Catalona WJ, D’Amico AV, Fitzgibbons WF et al (2012) What the US preventive services task force missed in its prostate cancer screening recommendation. Ann Intern Med 157:137–138CrossRefPubMed Catalona WJ, D’Amico AV, Fitzgibbons WF et al (2012) What the US preventive services task force missed in its prostate cancer screening recommendation. Ann Intern Med 157:137–138CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Hugosson J, Carlsson S, Aus G et al (2010) Mortality results from Goteborg randomized population-based prostate-cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncol 11:725–732CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hugosson J, Carlsson S, Aus G et al (2010) Mortality results from Goteborg randomized population-based prostate-cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncol 11:725–732CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Tsodikov A, Gulati R, Heijnsdijk EAM et al (2017) Reconciling the effects of screening on prostate cancer mortality in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. Ann Intern Med 167(7):449–455CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Tsodikov A, Gulati R, Heijnsdijk EAM et al (2017) Reconciling the effects of screening on prostate cancer mortality in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. Ann Intern Med 167(7):449–455CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Carter HB, Albertsen PC, Barry MK, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA guidelines. American Urological Association (AUA). 2013 Carter HB, Albertsen PC, Barry MK, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA guidelines. American Urological Association (AUA). 2013
9.
Zurück zum Zitat PDQ Screening and Prevention Editorial Board. PDQ prostate cancer screening. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. Updated 11/01/2016 PDQ Screening and Prevention Editorial Board. PDQ prostate cancer screening. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. Updated 11/01/2016
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Barocas DA, Mallin K, Graves AJ et al (2016) Effect of the USPSTF grade D recommendation against screening for prostate cancer on incident prostate cancer diagnoses in the United States. J Urol 194:1588–1593 Barocas DA, Mallin K, Graves AJ et al (2016) Effect of the USPSTF grade D recommendation against screening for prostate cancer on incident prostate cancer diagnoses in the United States. J Urol 194:1588–1593
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Shoag J, Halpern JA, Lee DJ et al (2016) Decline in prostate cancer screening by primary care physicians: an analysis of trends in the use of digital rectal examination and prostate specific antigen testing. J Urol 196:1–6CrossRef Shoag J, Halpern JA, Lee DJ et al (2016) Decline in prostate cancer screening by primary care physicians: an analysis of trends in the use of digital rectal examination and prostate specific antigen testing. J Urol 196:1–6CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Kelly SP, Rosenburg PS, Anderson WF et al (2017) Trends in the incidence of fatal prostate cancer in the United States by race. Eur Urol 71:195–201CrossRefPubMed Kelly SP, Rosenburg PS, Anderson WF et al (2017) Trends in the incidence of fatal prostate cancer in the United States by race. Eur Urol 71:195–201CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Gulati R, Gore JL, Etzioni R (2013) Comparative effectiveness of alternative PSA-based prostate cancer screening strategies. Ann Intern Med 158:145–153CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gulati R, Gore JL, Etzioni R (2013) Comparative effectiveness of alternative PSA-based prostate cancer screening strategies. Ann Intern Med 158:145–153CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Eapen RS et al (2017) Impact of the United States Preventive Services Task Force ‘D’ recommendation on prostate cancer screening and staging. Curr Opin Urol 27(3):205–209CrossRefPubMed Eapen RS et al (2017) Impact of the United States Preventive Services Task Force ‘D’ recommendation on prostate cancer screening and staging. Curr Opin Urol 27(3):205–209CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Mano R, Eastham J, Yossepowitch O (2016) The very-high-risk prostate cancer: a contemporary update. Prostate Cancer Prostat Dis 19:340–348CrossRef Mano R, Eastham J, Yossepowitch O (2016) The very-high-risk prostate cancer: a contemporary update. Prostate Cancer Prostat Dis 19:340–348CrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Carlsson S, Vickers AJ, Roobol M (2012) Prostate cancer screening: facts, statistics, and interpretation in response to the US preventive services task force review. J Clin Urol 30:2581–2584 Carlsson S, Vickers AJ, Roobol M (2012) Prostate cancer screening: facts, statistics, and interpretation in response to the US preventive services task force review. J Clin Urol 30:2581–2584
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Novara G, Ficarra V, Mocellin S et al (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting oncologic outcome after robot-assisted RP. Eur Urol 62:382–404CrossRefPubMed Novara G, Ficarra V, Mocellin S et al (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting oncologic outcome after robot-assisted RP. Eur Urol 62:382–404CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Hong YM, Hu JC, Paciorek AT et al (2010) Impact of RP positive surgical margins on fear of cancer recurrence: results from CaPSURE. Urol Oncol 28:268–273CrossRefPubMed Hong YM, Hu JC, Paciorek AT et al (2010) Impact of RP positive surgical margins on fear of cancer recurrence: results from CaPSURE. Urol Oncol 28:268–273CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Williams SB, Gu X, Lipsitz SR et al (2011) Utilization and expense of adjuvant cancer therapies following RP. Cancer 117:4846–4854CrossRefPubMed Williams SB, Gu X, Lipsitz SR et al (2011) Utilization and expense of adjuvant cancer therapies following RP. Cancer 117:4846–4854CrossRefPubMed
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Lowrance WT, Eastham JA, Yee DS et al (2012) Costs of medical care after open or minimally invasive prostate cancer surgery: a population-based analysis. Cancer 118:3079–3086CrossRefPubMed Lowrance WT, Eastham JA, Yee DS et al (2012) Costs of medical care after open or minimally invasive prostate cancer surgery: a population-based analysis. Cancer 118:3079–3086CrossRefPubMed
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Pound CR, Partin AW, Eisenburg MA et al (1999) Natural history of progression after PSA elevation following RP. JAMA 281:1591–1597CrossRefPubMed Pound CR, Partin AW, Eisenburg MA et al (1999) Natural history of progression after PSA elevation following RP. JAMA 281:1591–1597CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Freedland SJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA (2005) Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after RP. JAMA 294:433–439CrossRefPubMed Freedland SJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA (2005) Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after RP. JAMA 294:433–439CrossRefPubMed
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Cheng L, Zinke H, Blute ML et al (2011) Risk of prostate carcinoma death in patients with lymph node metastasis. Cancer 91:66–73CrossRef Cheng L, Zinke H, Blute ML et al (2011) Risk of prostate carcinoma death in patients with lymph node metastasis. Cancer 91:66–73CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Unintended consequences of decreased PSA-based prostate cancer screening
verfasst von
Thomas Ahlering
Linda My Huynh
Kamaljot S. Kaler
Stephen Williams
Kathryn Osann
Jean Joseph
David Lee
John W. Davis
Ronney Abaza
Jihad Kaouk
Vipul Patel
Isaac Yi Kim
James Porter
Jim C. Hu
Publikationsdatum
12.07.2018
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
World Journal of Urology / Ausgabe 3/2019
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2407-3

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2019

World Journal of Urology 3/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Update Urologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.