Cargando…
Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Objective To examine the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for prostate cancer. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources Electronic databases including Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, abstract proceedings, and reference lists up to July 2010. R...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2939952/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20843937 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c4543 |
_version_ | 1782186785656274944 |
---|---|
author | Djulbegovic, Mia Beyth, Rebecca J Neuberger, Molly M Stoffs, Taryn L Vieweg, Johannes Djulbegovic, Benjamin Dahm, Philipp |
author_facet | Djulbegovic, Mia Beyth, Rebecca J Neuberger, Molly M Stoffs, Taryn L Vieweg, Johannes Djulbegovic, Benjamin Dahm, Philipp |
author_sort | Djulbegovic, Mia |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objective To examine the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for prostate cancer. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources Electronic databases including Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, abstract proceedings, and reference lists up to July 2010. Review methods Included studies were randomised controlled trials comparing screening by prostate specific antigen with or without digital rectal examination versus no screening. Data abstraction and assessment of methodological quality with the GRADE approach was assessed by two independent reviewers and verified by the primary investigator. Mantel-Haenszel and inverse variance estimates were calculated and pooled under a random effects model expressing data as relative risks and 95% confidence intervals. Results Six randomised controlled trials with a total of 387 286 participants that met inclusion criteria were analysed. Screening was associated with an increased probability of receiving a diagnosis of prostate cancer (relative risk 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.77; P<0.001) and stage I prostate cancer (1.95, 1.22 to 3.13; P=0.005). There was no significant effect of screening on death from prostate cancer (0.88, 0.71 to 1.09; P=0.25) or overall mortality (0.99, 0.97 to 1.01; P=0.44). All trials had one or more substantial methodological limitations. None provided data on the effects of screening on participants’ quality of life. Little information was provided about potential harms associated with screening. Conclusions The existing evidence from randomised controlled trials does not support the routine use of screening for prostate cancer with prostate specific antigen with or without digital rectal examination. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2939952 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-29399522010-09-16 Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials Djulbegovic, Mia Beyth, Rebecca J Neuberger, Molly M Stoffs, Taryn L Vieweg, Johannes Djulbegovic, Benjamin Dahm, Philipp BMJ Research Objective To examine the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for prostate cancer. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources Electronic databases including Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, abstract proceedings, and reference lists up to July 2010. Review methods Included studies were randomised controlled trials comparing screening by prostate specific antigen with or without digital rectal examination versus no screening. Data abstraction and assessment of methodological quality with the GRADE approach was assessed by two independent reviewers and verified by the primary investigator. Mantel-Haenszel and inverse variance estimates were calculated and pooled under a random effects model expressing data as relative risks and 95% confidence intervals. Results Six randomised controlled trials with a total of 387 286 participants that met inclusion criteria were analysed. Screening was associated with an increased probability of receiving a diagnosis of prostate cancer (relative risk 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.77; P<0.001) and stage I prostate cancer (1.95, 1.22 to 3.13; P=0.005). There was no significant effect of screening on death from prostate cancer (0.88, 0.71 to 1.09; P=0.25) or overall mortality (0.99, 0.97 to 1.01; P=0.44). All trials had one or more substantial methodological limitations. None provided data on the effects of screening on participants’ quality of life. Little information was provided about potential harms associated with screening. Conclusions The existing evidence from randomised controlled trials does not support the routine use of screening for prostate cancer with prostate specific antigen with or without digital rectal examination. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2010-09-14 /pmc/articles/PMC2939952/ /pubmed/20843937 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c4543 Text en © Djulbegovic et al 2010 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode. |
spellingShingle | Research Djulbegovic, Mia Beyth, Rebecca J Neuberger, Molly M Stoffs, Taryn L Vieweg, Johannes Djulbegovic, Benjamin Dahm, Philipp Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title | Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_full | Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_fullStr | Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_short | Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_sort | screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2939952/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20843937 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c4543 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT djulbegovicmia screeningforprostatecancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT beythrebeccaj screeningforprostatecancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT neubergermollym screeningforprostatecancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT stoffstarynl screeningforprostatecancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT viewegjohannes screeningforprostatecancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT djulbegovicbenjamin screeningforprostatecancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT dahmphilipp screeningforprostatecancersystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials |