Search

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: Identification of intervention-related deaths is important for an accurate assessment of the ratio of benefit to harm in screening trials., Objective: To investigate intervention-related deaths by study arm in the European Randomized Study of Prostate Cancer Screening (ERSPC)., Design Setting and Participants: ERSPC is a multicenter trial initiated in the 1990s to investigate whether screening on the basis of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) can decrease prostate cancer mortality. The present study included men in the core age group (55-69 yr: screening group n = 112 553, control group n = 128 681) with 16-yr follow-up., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Causes of death among men with prostate cancer in ERSPC were predominantly evaluated by independent national committees via review of medical records according to a predefined algorithm. Intervention-related deaths were defined as deaths caused by complications during the screening procedure, treatment, or follow-up. Descriptive statistics were used for the results., Results and Limitations: In total, 34 deaths were determined to be intervention-related, of which 21 were in the screening arm and 13 in the control arm. The overall risk of intervention-related death was 1.41 (95% confidence interval 0.99-1.99) per 10 000 randomized men for both arms combined and varied among centers from 0 to 7.0 per 10 000 randomized men. A limitation of this study is that differences in procedures among centers decreased the comparability of the results., Conclusions: Intervention-related deaths were rare in ERSPC. Monitoring of intervention-related deaths in screening trials is important for assessment of harms., Patient Summary: We investigated deaths due to screening or treatment to assess harm in a trial of prostate cancer screening. Few such deaths were identified., (© 2021 The Author(s).)

Background: Reports on possible benefits for continence with nerve-sparing (NS) radical prostatectomy have expanded the indications beyond preservation of erectile function. It is unclear whether NS surgery affects oncological outcomes., Objective: To determine whether the degree of NS during radical prostatectomy influences oncological outcomes., Design Setting and Participants: Of 4003 patients enrolled in a prospective, controlled trial comparing open and robotic radical prostatectomy during 2008-2011, we evaluated 2401 patients who received robotic radical prostatectomy at seven Swedish centres. Patients were followed for 8 yr., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Data for recurrence and positive surgical margin status were assessed using validated patient questionnaires, patient interviews, and clinical record forms before and at 3, 12, and 24 mo and 6 and 8 yr after surgery. Cox and logistic regressions were used to model the effect on recurrence and positive surgical margins (PSM), respectively., Results and Limitations: A total of 481 men had PSM and 467 experienced recurrence during follow-up. Median follow-up for men without recurrence was 6.6 yr. There were no statistically significant differences in recurrence rate between degrees of NS. The PSM rate was significantly higher with a higher degree of NS: interfascial NS, odds ratio (OR) 2.32 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.69-3.16); intrafascial NS, OR 3.23 (95% CI 2.17-4.80). Recurrence rates were higher for patients with pT2 disease and PSM (hazard ratio [HR] 3.32, 95% CI 2.43-4.53) than for patients with pT3 disease without PSM (HR 2.08, 95% CI 1.66-2.62). The lack of central review of pathological specimens is a limitation., Conclusions: A higher degree of NS significantly increased the risk of PSM but did not significantly increase the risk of cancer recurrence. Combined with the known functional benefits of NS surgery, these results underscore the need to identify an individualised balance., Patient Summary: In this report we looked at the effect of a nerve-sparing approach during removal of the prostate on cancer outcomes for patients having robot-assisted surgery at seven Swedish hospitals. We found that a high degree of nerve-sparing increased the rate of cancer positivity at the margins of surgical specimens and that positive surgical margins increased the risk of recurrence of prostate cancer., (© 2021 The Authors.)

Background: Vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis is a well-known late complication after open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) with previously reported incidences of 2.7-15%. There are few reports of the incidence after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) compared with RRP., Objective: The aim was to compare the risk of developing symptomatic stenosis after RRP and RALP, and to explore potential risk factors and the influence of stenosis on the risk of urinary incontinence., Design, Setting, and Participants: Between 2008 and 2011, 4003 men were included in a prospective trial comparing RRP and RALP at 14 Swedish centres. Clinical data and patient questionnaires were collected before, during, and after surgery., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Stenosis was identified by either patients' reports in questionnaires or case report forms. The primary endpoint is reported as unadjusted as well as adjusted relative risks (RRs), calculated with log-binomial regression models. Data on incontinence were analysed by means of a log-binomial regression model, with stenosis as an independent and incontinence as a dependent variable., Results and Limitations: Symptomatic stenosis developed in 1.9% of 3706 evaluable men within 24 mo. The risk was 2.2 times higher after RRP than after RALP (RR 2.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.38-3.53). Overall, urinary incontinence was twice as common in patients who had stenosis (RR 2.01, 95% CI 1.43-2.64)., Conclusions: This large prospective study found an overall low rate of vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis after radical prostatectomy, but the rate was significantly lower after robot-assisted prostatectomy. The risk of stenosis seems to be associated with the number of sutures/takes in the anastomosis, but this was statistically significant only in the RALP group., Patient Summary: We investigated the risk of developing vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis after open and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. We found that the risk was generally lower than previously reported and lower after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy than after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urinary incontinence was twice as common in patients with stenosis., (Copyright © 2019 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)