The issue of prostate cancer screening

Czech version

Authors: Roman Zachoval ¹; Ladislav Dušek ^2,3; Marek Babjuk ⁴
Authors‘ workplace: Urologické oddělení, Thomayerova nemocnice a Urologická klinika, 1. a 3. lékařská fakulta Univerzity Karlovy, Praha ¹; Institut biostatistiky a analýz, Lékařská fakulta, Masarykova univerzita, Brno ²; Ústav zdravotnických informací a statistiky ČR, Praha ³; Urologická klinika, Fakultní nemocnice Motol a 2. lékařská fakulta Univerzity Karlovy, Praha ⁴
Published in: Ces Urol 2018; 22(1): 14-26
Category: Review article

Overview

Major statement:
Screening is an attempt to identify individuals with a certain disease in a broad segment of the population – those for whom there is no reason to suspect the disease. Now there is clear evidence that PSA screening reduces mortality if carried out for 10–15 years. The Czech Republic meets all requirements to perform selective prostate screening, particularly for a certain age group of men and for men with a history of other tumour disease with a life expectancy of 10–15 years.

Screening is an attempt to identify individuals with a certain disease in a broad segment of the population – those for whom there is no reason to suspect the disease. The screening is performed if there is a high risk of a disease within a population, if a proper diagnostic method exists, and if there is the possibility to treat the disease effectively. The term “early detection” is mainly used for opportunistic or selective screening.

The primary objective of screening is to reduce mortality while keeping the same quality of life as if no disease was diagnosed. Secondary objectives are related to identifying more individuals in less advanced stages of the disease and mapping the incidence of the disease precisely in a respective region.

The implementation of Prostate Specific Antigen examination played a key role for prostate screening. In several countries, a large increase in incidence was seen, as was a decrease in metastatic stage identification. Nevertheless, screening was still controversial, mainly for the uncertain impact on mortality reduction and for the diagnosis and treatment of clinically non significant stages and related adverse screening side-effects. However, it was recently clearly demonstrated that most of the studies were not performed properly. Now there is clear evidence that screening reduces mortality in case of 10–15 years of duration and this mortality reduction is the same as in other diseases for which screening is performed.

In accordance with the published literature, it is not a question if prostate screening should be performed, but how it should be performed. Screening, or the early detection program, should be performed selectively based on the recommendation of expert organizations regarding the epidemiological, health, structural and economic situation of a respective country, and regarding the individual health condition and wishes of an informed patient.

Recently, the main thesis of oncological prevention was defined by the Czech Oncological Society and by the Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic. The Czech Republic meets all the above mentioned professional requirements to perform selective prostate screening, particularly for a certain age group of men and for men with a history of other tumour disease with a life expectancy of 10–15 years. There is now an agreement for screening performance for these populations between professional societies (the Czech Urological Society and the Czech Oncological Society, the Institute of Health Information and Statistics of the Czech Republic, the Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic, and the country’s main health care payers.

Key words:
Screening, early detection, prostate, cancer

Sources

1. http://www.onko.cz/lekar‑co‑je‑to‑skrining‑screening.

2. http://uroweb.org/guideline/prostate‑cancer.

3. Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Screening and prostate‑cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 1320-1328.

4. Hugosson J, Carlsson S, Aus G, et al. Mortality results from the Goteborg randomised population‑based prostate‑cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 725-732.

5. Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Prostate‑cancer mortality at 11 years of follow‑up. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 981-990.

6. Jacobsen SJ, Katusic SK, Bergstrahl EJ, et al. Incidence of prostate cancer diagnosis in the eras before and after serum prostate‑specific antigen testing. JAMA 1995; 274: 1445-1449.

7. Kim EH, Andriole GL. Prostate‑specific antigen‑based screening: controversy and guidelines. BMC Med 2015; 13: 61.

8. Stanford JL, Stephenson RA, Coyle LM, et al. Prostate cancer trends 1973-1995, SEER program, national cancer institute. Bethesda, MD: NIH; 1999: pub 99-4543.

9. Wasserbauer R. Aktivní přístup k časné detekci karcinomu prostaty - co je smysluplné a co již škodlivé. Urol List 2014; 12(2): 19-28.

10. Belej K. Screening karcinomu prostaty. Onkologie 2009; 3(6): 351-356.

11. Carter HB, Albertsen PC, Barry MJ, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA Guideline. J Uol 2013; 190: 419-426.

12. Moyer VA. U.S. Preventive services task force. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2012; 157: 120-134.

13. Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL, et al. Mortality results from a randomized prostate‑cancer screening trial. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 1797.

14. Center MM, Jemal A, Lortet-Tieulent J, et al. International variation in prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 1079-1092.

15. Lima CA, Silva AM, Kuwano AY, Rangel MR, Macedo‑Lima M. Trends in prostate cancer incidence and mortality in a mid‑sized Northeastern Brazilian city. Ver Assoc Med Bras 2013; 59: 15-20.

16. https://seer.cancer.gov/registries/list.html.

17. Ilic D, Neuberger MM, Djulbegovic M, Dahm P. Screening for prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 1: CD004720.

18. Shteynshlyuger A, Andriole GL. Prostate cancer: to screen or not to screen? Urol Clin North Am 2010; 37: 1-9.

19. Etzioni R, Gulati R, Falcon S, Penson DF. Impact of PSA screening on the incidence of advanced stage prostate cancer in the United States: a surveillance modeling approach. Med Decis Making 2008; 28: 323-331.

20. Crawford ED, Abrahamsson PA. PSA‑based screening for prostate cancer: how does it compare with other cancer screening tests? Eur Urol 2008; 54: 262-273.

21. Welsh HG, Gorski DH, Albertsen PC. Trends in metatatic breast and prostate cancer - lessons in cancer dynamics. N Engl J Med 2015; 373: 1685-1687.

22. Lilja H, Cronin AM, Dahlin A, et al. Prediction of significant prostate cancer diagnosed 20 to 30 years later with a single measure of prostate‑specific antigen at or before age 50. Cancer 2011; 117: 1210-1219.

23. Vickers AJ, Ulmert D, Sjoberg DD, et al. Strategy for detection of prostate cancer based on relation between prostate specific antigen at age 40-55 and long term risk of metastasis: case‑control study. BMJ 2013; 346: f2023.

24. Pena SD, Di Pietro G, Fuchshuber‑Moraes M, et al. The genomic ancestry o individuals from different geographic regions of Brazil is more uniform than expected. PLoS One 2011; 6: e17063.

25. Heidenreich A, Abrahmsson PA, Artibani W, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: European Association of Urology recommendation. Eur Urol 2013; 64: 347-354.

26. Holmstrom B, Johansson M, Bergh A, et al. Prostate specific antigen for early detection of prostate cancer: longitudinal study. BMJ 2009; 339: b3537.

27. Vickers AJ, Cronin AM, Bjork T, et al. Prostate specific antigen concentration at age 60 and death or metastasis from prostate cancer: case‑control study. BMJ 2010; 341: c4521.

28. Carlsson S, Assel M, Sjoberg D, et al. Influence of prostate specific antigen levels at age 60 on benefits and harms of prostate cancer screening: population based cohort study. BMJ 2014; 348: g2206.

29. Aus G, Bergdahl S, Lodding P, Lilja H, Hugosson J. Prostate cancer screening decreases the absolute risk of being diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer - results from a prospective, population‑based randomized controlled trial. Eur Urol 2007; 51: 659-664.

30. Hayes JH, Barry MJ. Screening for prostate cancer with the prostate‑specific antigen test: a review of current evidence. JAMA 2014; 311: 1143-1149.

31. Draisma G, Etzioni R, Tsodikov A, et al. Lead time and overdiagnosis in prostate‑specific antigen screening: importance of methods and context. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009; 101: 374-383.

32. Rosario DJ, Lane JA, Metcalfe C, et al. Short term outcomes of prostate biopsy in men tested for cancer by prostate specific antigen: prospective evaluation within ProtecT stud. BMJ 2012; 344: d7894.

33. Chou R, Croswell JM, Dana T, et al. Screening for prostate cancer: a review of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Task Force. Ann Intern Md 2011; 155: 762-771.

34. Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2012; 367: 582.

35. Vickers AJ, Sjoberg DD, Ulmert D, et al. Empirical estimates of prostate cancer overdiagnosis by age and prostate‑specific antigen. BMC Med 2014; 12: 26.

36. Gulati R, Tsodikov A, Wever EM, et al. The impact of PLCO control arm contamination on perceived PSA screening efficacy. Cancer Causes Control 2012; 23: 827-835.

37. http://www.linkos.cz/prevence‑a-skrining/onkoprevence‑pro‑ceskou‑republiku-1/.

38. www.mamo.cz.

39. www.kolorektum.cz.

40. www.cervix.cz.

41. http://reporting.uzis.cz/.

42. https://www.uzis.cz/registry-nzis/nor.