Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Screening Arm (screening + arm)
Selected AbstractsEffect of the correction for noncompliance and contamination on the estimated reduction of metastatic prostate cancer within a randomized screening trial (ERSPC section Rotterdam)INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, Issue 11 2010Melissa Kerkhof Abstract The European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) has recently reported a 20% reduction in death from prostate cancer in a population-based prostate cancer screening (core age group: 55,69 years of age). The effect of screening may be diluted by noncompliance in the screening arm and contamination by PSA testing in the control arm. The purpose is to analyze the effect of prostate cancer screening on the incidence of metastatic prostate cancer, both with and without adjustment for noncompliance and contamination. We analyzed the occurrence of metastases in 42,376 men aged 55,75 years who were randomized in the Rotterdam section of the ERSPC between 1993 and 1999. Contamination adjustment was based on follow-up findings and questionnaire data from all men in the control group who developed prostate cancer and from a random sample of 291 men without cancer who had a PSA test. Prostate cancer screening significantly reduced the occurrence of metastatic prostate cancer in the intention-to-screen analysis [RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59,0.95, p = 0.02] and more so in adjusted analyses; contamination adjusted RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56,0.96; noncompliance adjusted RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55,0.95 and fully adjusted analysis RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49,0.94, p = 0.02. In the population of ERSPC Rotterdam (N = 42,376 men), screening reduces the risk to be diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer considerably on population level, an effect which is even more pronounced in men who are in fact screened. [source] Prostate cancer and PSA among statin users in the Finnish prostate cancer screening trialINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, Issue 7 2010Teemu J. Murtola Abstract Decreased risk of advanced prostate cancer has been reported among men using statins. However, the evidence on overall prostate cancer risk is conflicting. We compared the relative risk between current users and non-users of statins or other cholesterol-lowering medications in a population undergoing systematical prostate cancer screening. The study cohort comprised of 23,320 men participating in the screening arm of the Finnish prostate cancer screening trial during 1996,2004. Information on medication use was obtained from a comprehensive national prescription database. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to calculate multivariable adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for prostate cancer. Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level was compared between current users and non-users of cholesterol-lowering drugs. Compared with medication non-users, the overall prostate cancer incidence was decreased among statin users [HR 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63,0.89]. The inverse association was dose-dependent with cumulative amount of statin use, and strongest for low-grade and early stage tumors. The incidence was nonsignificantly lower also among users of other types of cholesterol-lowering drugs (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.28,1.38), but without dose-dependence. Age-adjusted median serum PSA tended to be lower among users of cholesterol-lowering drugs, but the relative risk decrease among statin users was not related to decreased PSA. Overall incidence of prostate cancer was lowered among statin users when bias due to differential PSA testing between medication users and non-users was eliminated by systematical prostate cancer screening. Cholesterol-lowering with statins seems beneficial for prostate cancer prevention. [source] Biological aggressiveness of prostate cancer in the Finnish screening trialINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, Issue 3 2009Marita Laurila Abstract Prostate cancer aggressiveness was evaluated based on pathologic characterization of cases detected in the Finnish prostate cancer screening trial. The trial population consists of 80,458 men aged 55,67 years. A total of 32,000 men were randomized to the screening arm. The remaining 48,000 men formed the control arm. The interval cases and cancers among nonparticipants and in the control arm were identified from the Finnish Cancer Registry. Random samples were selected from screen-detected cases (126 of 543 in the first and 133 of 508 in the second round) and control arm cancers (133 out of 863), in addition to all 92 interval cancers and 106 cases among nonparticipants. All the biopsies were regraded according to the Gleason system. The expression of the proliferation antigen Ki-67 was determined in 479 cases (72%). More than half of the tumors diagnosed in the first round of screening were high-grade cancers (Gleason 7 or higher). In the second round, the proportion of low-grade cancers increased from 47% to 70%. Cancers in the screening arm were more commonly focal and fewer bilateral cancers were detected. The cancers among nonparticipants were the most aggressive group. The aggressiveness of the interval cancers was between the cancers detected in the first and the second round. Our results indicate that prostate cancers detected through screening are less biologically aggressive. This was most notable after the first screening round. Nonparticipants had more aggressive cancers. © 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] Long-Term Effectiveness of Screening for Hearing Loss: The Screening for Auditory Impairment,Which Hearing Assessment Test (SAI-WHAT) Randomized TrialJOURNAL OF AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, Issue 3 2010Bevan Yueh MD OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of hearing screening on long-term hearing outcomes in a general population of older veterans. DESIGN: Hearing loss in the elderly is underdetected and undertreated. Routine hearing screening has been proposed, but it is not clear whether screening identifies patients who are sufficiently motivated to adhere to treatment. A four-arm randomized clinical trial was conducted to compare three screening strategies with no screening in 2,305 older veterans seeking general medical care. SETTING: Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System. INTERVENTIONS: The screening strategies were a tone-emitting otoscope, a widely used questionnaire about hearing handicap, and a combination of both tools. MEASUREMENTS: Hearing aid use 1 year after screening. RESULTS: Of participants who underwent screening with the tone-emitting otoscope, questionnaire, and combined testing, 18.6%, 59.2%, and 63.6%, respectively, screened positive for hearing loss (P<.01 for test of equality across three arms). Patients proceeded to formal audiology evaluation 14.7%, 23.0%, and 26.6% of the time in the same screening arms, compared with 10.8% in the control arm (P<.01 for test of equality across four arms). Hearing aid use 1 year after screening was 6.3%, 4.1%, and 7.4% in the same arms, compared with 3.3% in the control arm (P<.01). Hearing aid users experienced significant improvements in hearing-related function and communication ability. CONCLUSION: In older veterans, screening for hearing loss led to significantly more hearing aid use. Screening with the tone-emitting otoscope was more efficient. The results are most applicable to older populations with few cost barriers to hearing aids. [source] | ||||||||||