Lead Times and Overdetection Due to Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening: Estimates From the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer

Clicks: 1
ID: 297736
2003
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #288 of 333 articles by views in JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 333 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Background: Screening for prostate cancer advances the time of diagnosis (lead time) and detects cancers that would not have been diagnosed in the absence of screening (overdetection). Both consequences have considerable impact on the net benefits of screening. Methods: We developed simulation models based on results of the Rotterdam section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), which enrolled 42 376 men and in which 1498 cases of prostate cancer were identified, and on baseline prostate cancer incidence and stage distribution data. The models were used to predict mean lead times, overdetection rates, and ranges (corresponding to approximate 95% confidence intervals) associated with different screening programs. Results: Mean lead times and rates of overdetection depended on a man’s age at screening. For a single screening test at age 55, the estimated mean lead time was 12.3 years (range = 11.6–14.1 years) and the overdetection rate was 27% (range = 24%–37%); at age 75, the estimates were 6.0 years (range = 5.8–6.3 years) and 56% (range = 53%–61%), respectively. For a screening program with a 4-year screening interval from age 55 to 67, the estimated mean lead time was 11.2 years (range = 10.8–12.1 years), and the overdetection rate was 48% (range = 44%–55%). This screening program raised the lifetime risk of a prostate cancer diagnosis from 6.4% to 10.6%, a relative increase of 65% (range = 56%–87%). In annual screening from age 55 to 67, the estimated overdetection rate was 50% (range = 46%–57%) and the lifetime prostate cancer risk was increased by 80% (range = 69%–116%). Extending annual or quadrennial screening to the age of 75 would result in at least two cases of overdetection for every clinically relevant cancer detected. Conclusions: These model-based lead-time estimates support a prostate cancer screening interval of more than 1 year.
Reference Key
openalex_W2121103668 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Gerrit Draisma, Rob Boer, Suzie J. Otto, Ingrid W van der Cruijsen, Ronald Damhuis, F.H. Schröder, Harry J. de Koning
Journal JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Year 2003
DOI
10.1093/jnci/95.12.868
URL
https://academic.oup.com/jnci/article-pdf/95/12/868/9835198/868.pdf
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.