Home  |   Archive  |   Online Submission  |   News & Events  |   Subscribe  |   APFA  |   Society  |   Contact Us  |   中文版
Search   
 
Journal

-Ahead of print
-Authors' Accepted
    Manuscripts
new!
-Current Issue
-Archive
-Acknowledgments
-Special Issues
-Browse by Category

Manuscript Submission

-Online Submission
-Online Review
-Instruction for Authors
-Instruction for Reviewers
-English Corner new!

About AJA

-About AJA
-Editorial Board
-Contact Us
-News

Resources & Services

-Advertisement
-Subscription
-Email alert
-Proceedings
-Reprints

Download area

-Copyright licence
-EndNote style file
-Manuscript word template
-Guidance for AJA figures
    preparation (in English)

-Guidance for AJA figures
    preparation (in Chinese)

-Proof-reading for the
    authors

-AJA Club (in English)
-AJA Club (in Chinese)

 
Abstract

Volume 15, Issue 5 (September 2013) 15, 603–607; 10.1038/aja.2013.70

PSA screening for prostate cancer: why so much controversy?

Fernand Labrie

Laval University, Quebec, Que. G1V 4M7, Canada

Correspondence: Professor F Labrie, (flabrie@attglobal.net)

Received 21 November 2012; Revised 3 January 2013; Accepted 26 January 2013 Advance online publication 17 June 2013

Abstract

Since prostate cancer reaches the advanced and non curable stage in the absence of any specific symptom or sign, it seems reasonable to diagnose this cancer at an early and curable stage. Screening by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has been the common technology used. The last follow-up of the first two prospective and randomized screening studies for prostate cancer, namely the Quebec and ERSPC (European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer) clinical trials started in 1988 and 1991, respectively, have shown reductions of prostate cancer death of 62% (P<0.002) and 21% (P<0.001) (38% in the tenth and eleventh years of follow-up, P<0.003), respectively, while the PLCO (Prostate Lung Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer) screening trial reported no benefit. It has been estimated, however, that 85% of men in the planned ‘non-screened’ group of the US study have been screened. With such a serious flaw, the PLCO study does not have the statistical power to reach any valid conclusion. In the Quebec study, only 7.3% of men were screened in the control arm. The important benefit observed in the ERSPC study was achieved using a less than optimal 4-year PSA screening interval which misses a significant number of cancers while the Quebec study used the optimal 1-year interval. With proper information obtained from their physicians or otherwise using data collected only from the clinical trials having the required statistical power, men should be in a good position to decide about being or not being screened for prostate cancer.

Keywords: early diagnosis; improved survival prostate cancer; prostate-specific antigen; screening

PDF | PDF | 中文摘要 |

 
Browse:  4499
 
Asian Journal of Andrology CN 31-1795/R ISSN 1008-682X  Copyright © 2023  Shanghai Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Sciences.  All rights reserved.