Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 5 September 2018
- Vol. 362, k3519
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k3519
Abstract
Objective To investigate the efficacy and safety of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing to screen for prostate cancer. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Electronic search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, OpenGrey, LILACS, and Medline, and search of scientific meeting abstracts and trial registers to April 2018. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised controlled trials comparing PSA screening with usual care in men without a diagnosis of prostate cancer. Data extraction At least two reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of eligible studies. A parallel guideline committee (BMJ Rapid Recommendation) provided input on the design and interpretation of the systematic review, including selection of outcomes important to patients. We used a random effects model to obtain pooled incidence rate ratios (IRR) and, when feasible, conducted subgroup analyses (defined a priori) based on age, frequency of screening, family history, ethnicity, and socioeconomic level, as well as a sensitivity analysis based on the risk of bias. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the GRADE approach. Results Five randomised controlled trials, enrolling 721 718 men, were included. Studies varied with respect to screening frequency and intervals, PSA thresholds for biopsy, and risk of bias. When considering the whole body of evidence, screening probably has no effect on all-cause mortality (IRR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.01; moderate certainty) and may have no effect on prostate-specific mortality (IRR 0.96, 0.85 to 1.08; low certainty). Sensitivity analysis of studies at lower risk of bias (n=1) also demonstrates that screening seems to have no effect on all-cause mortality (IRR 1.0, 0.98 to 1.02; moderate certainty) but may have a small effect on prostate-specific mortality (IRR 0.79, 0.69 to 0.91; moderate certainty). This corresponds to one less death from prostate cancer per 1000 men screened over 10 years. Direct comparative data on biopsy and treatment related complications from the included trials were limited. Using modelling, we estimated that for every 1000 men screened, approximately 1, 3, and 25 more men would be hospitalised for sepsis, require pads for urinary incontinence, and report erectile dysfunction, respectively. Conclusions At best, screening for prostate cancer leads to a small reduction in disease-specific mortality over 10 years but has does not affect overall mortality. Clinicians and patients considering PSA based screening need to weigh these benefits against the potential short and long term harms of screening, including complications from biopsies and subsequent treatment, as well as the risk of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registration number CRD42016042347.This publication has 40 references indexed in Scilit:
- Screening for prostate cancerCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2013
- Prostate Cancer Screening in the Randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial: Mortality Results after 13 Years of Follow-upJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2012
- GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence—imprecisionJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2011
- GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistencyJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2011
- The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trialsBMJ, 2011
- Randomised prostate cancer screening trial: 20 year follow-upBMJ, 2011
- Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trialsBMJ, 2010
- GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendationsBMJ, 2008
- Screening decreases prostate cancer mortality: 11‐year follow‐up of the 1988 Quebec prospective randomized controlled trialThe Prostate, 2004
- Review papers : The statistical basis of meta-analysisStatistical Methods in Medical Research, 1993