Cargando…
Impact of cause of death adjudication on the results of the European prostate cancer screening trial
BACKGROUND: The European Randomised Study of Prostate Cancer Screening has shown a 21% relative reduction in prostate cancer mortality at 13 years. The causes of death can be misattributed, particularly in elderly men with multiple comorbidities, and therefore accurate assessment of the underlying c...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5220145/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27855442 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2016.378 |
_version_ | 1782492571968208896 |
---|---|
author | Walter, Stephen D de Koning, Harry J Hugosson, Jonas Talala, Kirsi Roobol, Monique J Carlsson, Sigrid Zappa, Marco Nelen, Vera Kwiatkowski, Maciej Páez, Álvaro Moss, Sue Auvinen, Anssi |
author_facet | Walter, Stephen D de Koning, Harry J Hugosson, Jonas Talala, Kirsi Roobol, Monique J Carlsson, Sigrid Zappa, Marco Nelen, Vera Kwiatkowski, Maciej Páez, Álvaro Moss, Sue Auvinen, Anssi |
author_sort | Walter, Stephen D |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The European Randomised Study of Prostate Cancer Screening has shown a 21% relative reduction in prostate cancer mortality at 13 years. The causes of death can be misattributed, particularly in elderly men with multiple comorbidities, and therefore accurate assessment of the underlying cause of death is crucial for valid results. To address potential unreliability of end-point assessment, and its possible impact on mortality results, we analysed the study outcome adjudication data in six countries. METHODS: Latent class statistical models were formulated to compare the accuracy of individual adjudicators, and to assess whether accuracy differed between the trial arms. We used the model to assess whether correcting for adjudication inaccuracies might modify the study results. RESULTS: There was some heterogeneity in adjudication accuracy of causes of death, but no consistent differential accuracy by trial arm. Correcting the estimated screening effect for misclassification did not alter the estimated mortality effect of screening. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings were consistent with earlier reports on the European screening trial. Observer variation, while demonstrably present, is unlikely to have materially biased the main study results. A bias in assigning causes of death that might have explained the mortality reduction by screening can be effectively ruled out. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5220145 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-52201452018-01-03 Impact of cause of death adjudication on the results of the European prostate cancer screening trial Walter, Stephen D de Koning, Harry J Hugosson, Jonas Talala, Kirsi Roobol, Monique J Carlsson, Sigrid Zappa, Marco Nelen, Vera Kwiatkowski, Maciej Páez, Álvaro Moss, Sue Auvinen, Anssi Br J Cancer Epidemiology BACKGROUND: The European Randomised Study of Prostate Cancer Screening has shown a 21% relative reduction in prostate cancer mortality at 13 years. The causes of death can be misattributed, particularly in elderly men with multiple comorbidities, and therefore accurate assessment of the underlying cause of death is crucial for valid results. To address potential unreliability of end-point assessment, and its possible impact on mortality results, we analysed the study outcome adjudication data in six countries. METHODS: Latent class statistical models were formulated to compare the accuracy of individual adjudicators, and to assess whether accuracy differed between the trial arms. We used the model to assess whether correcting for adjudication inaccuracies might modify the study results. RESULTS: There was some heterogeneity in adjudication accuracy of causes of death, but no consistent differential accuracy by trial arm. Correcting the estimated screening effect for misclassification did not alter the estimated mortality effect of screening. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings were consistent with earlier reports on the European screening trial. Observer variation, while demonstrably present, is unlikely to have materially biased the main study results. A bias in assigning causes of death that might have explained the mortality reduction by screening can be effectively ruled out. Nature Publishing Group 2017-01-03 2016-11-17 /pmc/articles/PMC5220145/ /pubmed/27855442 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2016.378 Text en Copyright © 2016 Cancer Research UK http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ From twelve months after its original publication, this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 4.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Epidemiology Walter, Stephen D de Koning, Harry J Hugosson, Jonas Talala, Kirsi Roobol, Monique J Carlsson, Sigrid Zappa, Marco Nelen, Vera Kwiatkowski, Maciej Páez, Álvaro Moss, Sue Auvinen, Anssi Impact of cause of death adjudication on the results of the European prostate cancer screening trial |
title | Impact of cause of death adjudication on the results of the European prostate cancer screening trial |
title_full | Impact of cause of death adjudication on the results of the European prostate cancer screening trial |
title_fullStr | Impact of cause of death adjudication on the results of the European prostate cancer screening trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Impact of cause of death adjudication on the results of the European prostate cancer screening trial |
title_short | Impact of cause of death adjudication on the results of the European prostate cancer screening trial |
title_sort | impact of cause of death adjudication on the results of the european prostate cancer screening trial |
topic | Epidemiology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5220145/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27855442 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2016.378 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT walterstephend impactofcauseofdeathadjudicationontheresultsoftheeuropeanprostatecancerscreeningtrial AT dekoningharryj impactofcauseofdeathadjudicationontheresultsoftheeuropeanprostatecancerscreeningtrial AT hugossonjonas impactofcauseofdeathadjudicationontheresultsoftheeuropeanprostatecancerscreeningtrial AT talalakirsi impactofcauseofdeathadjudicationontheresultsoftheeuropeanprostatecancerscreeningtrial AT roobolmoniquej impactofcauseofdeathadjudicationontheresultsoftheeuropeanprostatecancerscreeningtrial AT carlssonsigrid impactofcauseofdeathadjudicationontheresultsoftheeuropeanprostatecancerscreeningtrial AT zappamarco impactofcauseofdeathadjudicationontheresultsoftheeuropeanprostatecancerscreeningtrial AT nelenvera impactofcauseofdeathadjudicationontheresultsoftheeuropeanprostatecancerscreeningtrial AT kwiatkowskimaciej impactofcauseofdeathadjudicationontheresultsoftheeuropeanprostatecancerscreeningtrial AT paezalvaro impactofcauseofdeathadjudicationontheresultsoftheeuropeanprostatecancerscreeningtrial AT mosssue impactofcauseofdeathadjudicationontheresultsoftheeuropeanprostatecancerscreeningtrial AT auvinenanssi impactofcauseofdeathadjudicationontheresultsoftheeuropeanprostatecancerscreeningtrial AT impactofcauseofdeathadjudicationontheresultsoftheeuropeanprostatecancerscreeningtrial |