A different method of evaluation of the ERSPC trial confirms that prostate-specific antigen testing has a significant impact on prostate cancer mortality

Marco Zappa; Donella Puliti; Jonas Hugosson; Fritz H. Schröder; Pim J. Van Leeuwen; Ries Kranse; Anssi Auvinen; Sigrid Carlsson; Maciej Kwiatkowski; Vera Nelen; Alvaro Paez Borda; Monique J. Roobol; Arnauld Villers

doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.055

A different method of evaluation of the ERSPC trial confirms that prostate-specific antigen testing has a significant impact on prostate cancer mortality

Marco Zappa, Donella Puliti, Jonas Hugosson, Fritz H. Schröder, Pim J. Van Leeuwen, Ries Kranse, Anssi Auvinen, Sigrid Carlsson, Maciej Kwiatkowski, Vera Nelen, Alvaro Paez Borda, Monique J. Roobol, Arnauld Villers

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Scientific › peer-review

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The advantages and disadvantages of two different methods of analyzing the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial with respect to the effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer (PCa) mortality (ie, disease-specific mortality analysis and excess mortality analysis) are discussed in depth. The traditional disease-specific mortality is the best end point, but it could be biased by misclassification of causes of death, and it does not take into account the possible effect of the screening process on other causes of death. Excess mortality analysis overcomes these problems, but the results could be biased if the expected mortality is not corrected for attendance status. Both methods, when applied to the ERSPC trials, demonstrate that no increase in non-PCa mortality occurred in the screening group and confirm that PSA screening decreases PCa mortality.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	401-403
Number of pages	3
Journal	European Urology
Volume	66
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.055
Publication status	Published - 2014
Publication type	A1 Journal article-refereed

Keywords

Excess mortality
Screening

Publication forum classification

Publication forum level 2

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.055

Cite this

Zappa, M., Puliti, D., Hugosson, J., Schröder, F. H., Van Leeuwen, P. J., Kranse, R., Auvinen, A., Carlsson, S., Kwiatkowski, M., Nelen, V., Borda, A. P., Roobol, M. J., & Villers, A. (2014). A different method of evaluation of the ERSPC trial confirms that prostate-specific antigen testing has a significant impact on prostate cancer mortality. European Urology, 66(3), 401-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.055

@article{202150892f184d75abc373c1b7f01ec7,

title = "A different method of evaluation of the ERSPC trial confirms that prostate-specific antigen testing has a significant impact on prostate cancer mortality",

abstract = "The advantages and disadvantages of two different methods of analyzing the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial with respect to the effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer (PCa) mortality (ie, disease-specific mortality analysis and excess mortality analysis) are discussed in depth. The traditional disease-specific mortality is the best end point, but it could be biased by misclassification of causes of death, and it does not take into account the possible effect of the screening process on other causes of death. Excess mortality analysis overcomes these problems, but the results could be biased if the expected mortality is not corrected for attendance status. Both methods, when applied to the ERSPC trials, demonstrate that no increase in non-PCa mortality occurred in the screening group and confirm that PSA screening decreases PCa mortality.",

keywords = "Excess mortality, Screening, Excess mortality, Screening",

author = "Marco Zappa and Donella Puliti and Jonas Hugosson and Schr{\"o}der, {Fritz H.} and {Van Leeuwen}, {Pim J.} and Ries Kranse and Anssi Auvinen and Sigrid Carlsson and Maciej Kwiatkowski and Vera Nelen and Borda, {Alvaro Paez} and Roobol, {Monique J.} and Arnauld Villers",

year = "2014",

doi = "10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.055",

language = "English",

volume = "66",

pages = "401--403",

journal = "European Urology",

issn = "0302-2838",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "3",

}

Zappa, M, Puliti, D, Hugosson, J, Schröder, FH, Van Leeuwen, PJ, Kranse, R, Auvinen, A, Carlsson, S, Kwiatkowski, M, Nelen, V, Borda, AP, Roobol, MJ & Villers, A 2014, 'A different method of evaluation of the ERSPC trial confirms that prostate-specific antigen testing has a significant impact on prostate cancer mortality', European Urology, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 401-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.055

TY - JOUR

T1 - A different method of evaluation of the ERSPC trial confirms that prostate-specific antigen testing has a significant impact on prostate cancer mortality

AU - Zappa, Marco

AU - Puliti, Donella

AU - Hugosson, Jonas

AU - Schröder, Fritz H.

AU - Van Leeuwen, Pim J.

AU - Kranse, Ries

AU - Auvinen, Anssi

AU - Carlsson, Sigrid

AU - Kwiatkowski, Maciej

AU - Nelen, Vera

AU - Borda, Alvaro Paez

AU - Roobol, Monique J.

AU - Villers, Arnauld

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - The advantages and disadvantages of two different methods of analyzing the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial with respect to the effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer (PCa) mortality (ie, disease-specific mortality analysis and excess mortality analysis) are discussed in depth. The traditional disease-specific mortality is the best end point, but it could be biased by misclassification of causes of death, and it does not take into account the possible effect of the screening process on other causes of death. Excess mortality analysis overcomes these problems, but the results could be biased if the expected mortality is not corrected for attendance status. Both methods, when applied to the ERSPC trials, demonstrate that no increase in non-PCa mortality occurred in the screening group and confirm that PSA screening decreases PCa mortality.

AB - The advantages and disadvantages of two different methods of analyzing the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial with respect to the effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer (PCa) mortality (ie, disease-specific mortality analysis and excess mortality analysis) are discussed in depth. The traditional disease-specific mortality is the best end point, but it could be biased by misclassification of causes of death, and it does not take into account the possible effect of the screening process on other causes of death. Excess mortality analysis overcomes these problems, but the results could be biased if the expected mortality is not corrected for attendance status. Both methods, when applied to the ERSPC trials, demonstrate that no increase in non-PCa mortality occurred in the screening group and confirm that PSA screening decreases PCa mortality.

KW - Excess mortality

KW - Screening

KW - Excess mortality

KW - Screening

U2 - 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.055

DO - 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.055

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84905912396

SN - 0302-2838

VL - 66

SP - 401

EP - 403

JO - European Urology

JF - European Urology

IS - 3

ER -

A different method of evaluation of the ERSPC trial confirms that prostate-specific antigen testing has a significant impact on prostate cancer mortality

Abstract

Keywords

Publication forum classification

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this