Search

Background: Data on the efficacy and safety of screening for prostate cancer with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are needed from studies of follow-up screening., Methods: In a population-based trial that started in 2015, we invited men who were 50 to 60 years of age to undergo prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening. Men with a PSA level of 3 ng per milliliter or higher underwent MRI of the prostate. Men were randomly assigned to the systematic biopsy group, in which they underwent systematic biopsy and, if suspicious lesions were found on MRI, targeted biopsy, or the MRI-targeted biopsy group, in which they underwent MRI-targeted biopsy only. At each visit, men were invited for repeat screening 2, 4, or 8 years later, depending on the PSA level. The primary outcome was detection of clinically insignificant (International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] grade 1) prostate cancer; detection of clinically significant (ISUP grade ≥2) cancer was a secondary outcome, and detection of clinically advanced or high-risk (metastatic or ISUP grade 4 or 5) cancer was also assessed., Results: After a median follow-up of 3.9 years (approximately 26,000 person-years in each group), prostate cancer had been detected in 185 of the 6575 men (2.8%) in the MRI-targeted biopsy group and 298 of the 6578 men (4.5%) in the systematic biopsy group. The relative risk of detecting clinically insignificant cancer in the MRI-targeted biopsy group as compared with the systematic biopsy group was 0.43 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32 to 0.57; P<0.001) and was lower at repeat rounds of screening than in the first round (relative risk, 0.25 vs. 0.49); the relative risk of a diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.66 to 1.07). The number of advanced or high-risk cancers detected (by screening or as interval cancer) was 15 in the MRI-targeted biopsy group and 23 in the systematic biopsy group (relative risk, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.34 to 1.24). Five severe adverse events occurred (three in the systematic biopsy group and two in the MRI-targeted biopsy group)., Conclusions: In this trial, omitting biopsy in patients with negative MRI results eliminated more than half of diagnoses of clinically insignificant prostate cancer, and the associated risk of having incurable cancer diagnosed at screening or as interval cancer was very low. (Funded by Karin and Christer Johansson's Foundation and others; GÖTEBORG-2 ISRCTN registry number, ISRCTN94604465.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

MRI retains its ability to reduce the harm of prostate biopsies by decreasing biopsy rates and the detection of indolent cancers in population-based screening studies aiming to find clinically significant prostate cancers. Limitations of low positive predictive values and high reader variability in diagnostic performance require optimisations in patient selection, imaging protocols, interpretation standards, diagnostic thresholds, and biopsy methods. Improvements in diagnostic accuracy could come about through emerging technologies like risk calculators and polygenic risk scores to select men for MRI. Furthermore, artificial intelligence and workflow optimisations focused on streamlining the diagnostic pathway, quality control, and assurance measures will improve MRI variability. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: MRI significantly reduces harm in prostate cancer screening, lowering unnecessary biopsies and minimizing the overdiagnosis of indolent cancers. MRI maintains the effective detection of high-grade cancers, thus improving the overall benefit-to-harm ratio in population-based screenings with or without using serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for patient selection. KEY POINTS: • The use of MRI enables the harm reduction benefits seen in individual early cancer detection to be extended to both risk-stratified and non-stratified prostate cancer screening populations. • MRI limitations include a low positive predictive value and imperfect reader variability, which require standardising interpretations, biopsy methods, and integration into a quality diagnostic pathway. • Current evidence is based on one-time point use of MRI in screening; MRI effectiveness in multiple rounds of screening is not well-documented., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to European Society of Radiology.)

Background: A prerequisite before introducing a screening program is that the screening examinations are acceptable to participants., Objective: To evaluate the acceptance and bother of prostate cancer screening examinations., Design, Setting, and Participants: The randomized population-based GÖTEBORG-2 prostate cancer screening trial invited >37 000 men for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing followed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in case of elevated PSA and prostate biopsy (targeted and/or systematic) if indicated., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Participants were asked to fill out a questionnaire and rate the level of bother associated with each examination (PSA, MRI, and prostate biopsy) on a categorical scale ranging from 1 to 5 (1 = "not at all bothersome" and 5 = "very bothersome"), and to rate their willingness to repeat the examinations, by marking an X on a continuous scale ranging from 0 to 10 (0 = "yes, without any hesitation" and 10 = "no, absolutely not"). Wilcoxon signed rank test was used., Results and Limitations: Compliance with MRI was 96% (1790/1872), compliance with biopsy was 89% (810/907), and the response rate to the questionnaire was 75% (608/810). Men who underwent all examinations (n = 577) responded that biopsy was more bothersome than PSA test (p < 0.001) and MRI (p < 0.001). High levels of bother (≥4 out of 5) were reported by 2% (12/577) for PSA test, 8% (46/577) for MRI, and 43% (247/577) for biopsy. Men were more willing to repeat MRI than biopsy (p < 0.001), but the difference was small (median 0.2 [interquartile range 0.1-0.6] vs 0.5 [0.1-2.0])., Conclusions: Biopsies are more bothersome than MRI, but a large majority of men accept to repeat both examinations if necessary. Omitting biopsy for MRI-negative men and shifting to targeted biopsies only will reduce bother for men participating in prostate cancer screening., Patient Summary: We asked men how bothersome they found the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and prostate biopsies. Biopsies were more bothersome than PSA and MRI, but most men were willing to repeat all procedures if necessary., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The European Union recently recommended evaluation of the feasibility of organised prostate cancer screening. In Sweden, regional population-based organised prostate cancer testing (OPT) programmes were introduced in 2020., Objective: To describe initial participation rates and diagnostic outcomes., Design, Setting, and Participants: The three most populated Swedish regions invited all men aged 50 yr to OPT by a letter in 2020-2022. Men with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥3 ng/ml were referred for prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). PSA assays differed across regions. Men with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 1-3 and PSA density ≥0.15 ng/ml/cm 3 or PI-RADS 4-5 were referred for a biopsy. Data were obtained from the Swedish Register for Organised Prostate Cancer Testing., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Overall and regional participation rates, PSA distributions, PI-RADS score distributions, cancer detection, and treatment were evaluated., Results and Limitations: A total of 23 855 (35%) of 68 060 invited men participated; 696 (2.9%) had PSA ≥3 ng/ml, and of them, 306 (44%) had a biopsy indication and 221 (32%) had a biopsy. On biopsy, 93 (42%) had Gleason grade group ≥2 (0.39% of PSA-tested men) and 44 (20%) Gleason grade group 1 cancer. Most men with cancer had treatment with curative intent (70%) or were under active surveillance (28%). Across regions, proportions of men with PSA ≥3 ng/ml ranged from 2.3% to 4.0%, and those with PI-RADS score 4-5 ranged from 12% to 21%. A limitation is that results are applicable only to first testing of men in their early 50s., Conclusions: The OPT programmes are feasible with good compliance to the diagnostic pathway. The use of MRI and PSA density avoided a biopsy for over half of the men with PSA ≥3 ng/ml. Inter-regional differences in diagnostic outcomes show a need for standardisation of the diagnostic pathway's components., Patient Summary: We report the diagnostic outcomes of inviting 68 000 50-yr-old men to organised prostate cancer testing., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The European Association of Urology guidelines recommend a risk-based strategy for prostate cancer screening based on the first prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and age., Objective: To analyze the impact of the first PSA level on prostate cancer (PCa) detection and PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) in a population-based screening trial (repeat screening every 2-4 yr)., Design, Setting, and Participants: We evaluated 25589 men aged 55-59 yr, 16898 men aged 60-64 yr, and 12936 men aged 65-69 yr who attended at least one screening visit in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial (screening arm: repeat PSA testing every 2-4 yr and biopsy in cases with elevated PSA; control arm: no active screening offered) during 16-yr follow-up (FU)., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: We assessed the actuarial probability for any PCa and for clinically significant (cs)PCa (Gleason ≥7). Cox proportional-hazards regression was performed to assess whether the association between baseline PSA and PCSM was comparable for all age groups. A Lorenz curve was computed to assess the association between baseline PSA and PCSM for men aged 60-61 yr., Results and Limitations: The overall actuarial probability at 16 yr ranged from 12% to 16% for any PCa and from 3.7% to 5.7% for csPCa across the age groups. The actuarial probability of csPCa at 16 yr ranged from 1.2-1.5% for men with PSA <1.0 ng/ml to 13.3-13.8% for men with PSA ≥3.0 ng/ml. The association between baseline PSA and PCSM differed marginally among the three age groups. A Lorenz curve for men aged 60-61 yr showed that 92% of lethal PCa cases occurred among those with PSA above the median (1.21 ng/ml). In addition, for men initially screened at age 60-61 yr with baseline PSA <2 ng/ml, further continuation of screening is unlikely to be beneficial after the age of 68-70 yr if PSA is still <2 ng/ml. No case of PCSM emerged in the subsequent 8 yr (up to age 76-78 yr). A limitation is that these results may not be generalizable to an opportunistic screening setting or to contemporary clinical practice., Conclusions: In all age groups, baseline PSA can guide decisions on the repeat screening interval. Baseline PSA of <1.0 ng/ml for men aged 55-69 yr is a strong indicator to delay or stop further screening., Patient Summary: In prostate cancer screening, the patient's baseline PSA (prostate-specific antigen) level can be used to guide decisions on when to repeat screening. The PSA test when used according to current knowledge is valuable in helping to reduce the burden of prostate cancer., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Screening for prostate cancer is burdened by a high rate of overdiagnosis. The most appropriate algorithm for population-based screening is unknown., Methods: We invited 37,887 men who were 50 to 60 years of age to undergo regular prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening. Participants with a PSA level of 3 ng per milliliter or higher underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate; one third of the participants were randomly assigned to a reference group that underwent systematic biopsy as well as targeted biopsy of suspicious lesions shown on MRI. The remaining participants were assigned to the experimental group and underwent MRI-targeted biopsy only. The primary outcome was clinically insignificant prostate cancer, defined as a Gleason score of 3+3. The secondary outcome was clinically significant prostate cancer, defined as a Gleason score of at least 3+4. Safety was also assessed., Results: Of the men who were invited to undergo screening, 17,980 (47%) participated in the trial. A total of 66 of the 11,986 participants in the experimental group (0.6%) received a diagnosis of clinically insignificant prostate cancer, as compared with 72 of 5994 participants (1.2%) in the reference group, a difference of -0.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.0 to -0.4; relative risk, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.64; P<0.001). The relative risk of clinically significant prostate cancer in the experimental group as compared with the reference group was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.60 to 1.1). Clinically significant cancer that was detected only by systematic biopsy was diagnosed in 10 participants in the reference group; all cases were of intermediate risk and involved mainly low-volume disease that was managed with active surveillance. Serious adverse events were rare (<0.1%) in the two groups., Conclusions: The avoidance of systematic biopsy in favor of MRI-directed targeted biopsy for screening and early detection in persons with elevated PSA levels reduced the risk of overdiagnosis by half at the cost of delaying detection of intermediate-risk tumors in a small proportion of patients. (Funded by Karin and Christer Johansson's Foundation and others; GÖTEBORG-2 ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN94604465.)., (Copyright © 2022 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: Studies have suggested associations between greater age, increased risk of prostate cancer (PC), and higher Gleason score., Objective: The present study aimed at investigating these associations within the Göteborg-1 randomized, population-based PC screening trial., Design, Setting, and Participants: The screening arm of the Göteborg-1 screening trial comprises 10000 randomly selected men (aged 50-64 yr at randomization) from the Göteborg region of Sweden. Between 1995 and 2014, they were biennially invited to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing to an upper age limit of 70 yr (range 67-71 yr). PSA ≥3 ng/ml triggered a prostate biopsy (sextant biopsy 1995-2009, thereafter a ten-core biopsy)., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The impact of age on Gleason score, given a screen-detected PC, was investigated with multinomial logistic regression analyses adjusted for year of testing and screening round., Results and Limitations: Overall, 7625 men had at least one PSA test and 1022 men were diagnosed with PC. For men with screen-detected PC, age was associated with the risk of clinically significant PC above and beyond screening round and year of testing (p < 0.001). For each 1-yr increase in age, the risk of being diagnosed with a Gleason score ≥3 + 4 cancer (vs <7) increased by 11% (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.7-17), whereas the risk of being diagnosed with a Gleason score ≥4 + 3 cancer (vs <7) increased by 8.5% (95% CI -1.6 to 20)., Conclusions: The increased risk of a higher Gleason score in older men should be considered when counseling men regarding early diagnosis and treatment for PC., Patient Summary: We found that older age increased both the risk of prostate cancer and the risk of more aggressive prostate cancer., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Our goal was to analyze results from 22 years of followup in the Göteborg randomized prostate cancer (PC) screening trial., Materials and Methods: In December 1994, 20,000 men born 1930-1944 were randomly extracted from the Swedish population register and were randomized (1:1) into either a screening group (SG) or to a control group (CG). Men in the SG were repeatedly invited for biennial prostate specific antigen testing up to an average age of 69 years. Main endpoints were PC incidence and mortality (intention-to-screen principle)., Results: After 22 years, 1,528 men in the SG and 1,124 men in the CG had been diagnosed with PC. In total, 112 PC deaths occurred in the SG and 158 in the CG. Compared with the CG, the SG showed a PC incidence rate ratio (RR) of 1.42 (95% CI, 1.31-1.53) and a PC mortality RR of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.55-0.91). The 22-year cumulative PC mortality rate was 1.55% (95% CI, 1.29-1.86) in the SG and 2.13% (95% CI, 1.83-2.49) in the CG. Correction for nonattendance (Cuzick method) yielded a RR of PC mortality of 0.59 (95% CI, 0.43-0.80). Number needed to invite and number needed to diagnose was estimated to 221 and 9, respectively. PC death risk was increased in the following groups: nontesting men, men entering the program after age 60 and men with >10 years of followup after screening termination., Conclusions: Prostate specific antigen-based screening substantially decreases PC mortality. However, not attending, starting after age 60 and stopping at age 70 seem to be major pitfalls regarding PC death risk.