Editorials2 August 2005An Editorial Update: Should Benefits of Radical Prostatectomy Affect the Decision To Screen for Early Prostate Cancer?Harold C. Sox, MD, Editor and Cynthia Mulrow, MD, MSc, Deputy EditorHarold C. Sox, MD, EditorSearch for more papers by this author and Cynthia Mulrow, MD, MSc, Deputy EditorSearch for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-143-3-200508020-00011 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail In 2002, Annals published a systematic review that addressed several issues relevant to prostate cancer screening (1). Based on the review, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force gave prostate cancer screening a grade I recommendation, which means that the members thought that the evidence about the balance of benefits and harms of screening was insufficient to make a stronger recommendation (2). The Task Force had the following concerns: 1) There was only “mixed and inconclusive” evidence that early treatment of prostate cancer could prevent adverse outcomes and 2) treatment was associated with a high risk for substantial harm, principally urinary ...References1. Harris R, Lohr KN. Screening for prostate cancer: an update of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:917-29. [PMID: 12458993] LinkGoogle Scholar2. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer: recommendation and rationale. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:915-6. [PMID: 12458992] LinkGoogle Scholar3. Holmberg L, Bill-Axelson A, Helgesen F, Salo JO, Folmerz P, Haggman M, et al. A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:781-9. [PMID: 12226148] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, Haggman M, Andersson SO, Bratell S, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:1977-84. [PMID: 15888698] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Wilt T. Prostate cancer (non-metastatic). Clin Evid. 2004;:1271-86. [PMID: 15865718] MedlineGoogle Scholar6. Wilt TJ, Brawer MK. The Prostate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial: a randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy versus expectant management for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 1994;152:1910-4. [PMID: 7523736] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar7. Gohagan JK, Prorok PC, Hayes RB, Kramer BS. The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial of the National Cancer Institute: history, organization, and status. Control Clin Trials. 2000;21:251S-272S. [PMID: 11189683] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. van der Cruijsen-Koeter IW, Vis AN, Roobol MJ, Wildhagen MF, de Koning HJ, van der Kwast TH, et al. Comparison of screen detected and clinically diagnosed prostate cancer in the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer, section rotterdam. J Urol. 2005;174:121-5. [PMID: 15947595] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAuthors: Harold C. Sox, MD, Editor; Cynthia Mulrow, MD, MSc, Deputy EditorDisclosures: None disclosed.Corresponding Author: Customer Service, American College of Physicians, 190 N. Independence Mall West, Philadelphia, PA 19106-1572. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics Cited byAscertaining cause of death among men in the Prostate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation TrialProstate-Specific Antigen Screening and Mortality from Prostate CancerAssessment of prognosis with the total illness burden index for prostate cancerA National Survey of Medical Students’ Beliefs and Knowledge in Screening for Prostate CancerA population-based survey of prostate-specific antigen testing among California men at higher risk for prostate carcinoma 2 August 2005Volume 143, Issue 3Page: 232-233KeywordsCancer screeningCancer treatmentMortalityProstate cancerRadiation therapyRadical prostatectomyRandomized trialsSurgerySystematic reviewsUrinary incontinence ePublished: 2 August 2005 Issue Published: 2 August 2005 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2005 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sox et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: