Loeb Stacy, Bjurlin Marc A, Nicholson Joseph, Tammela Teuvo L, Penson David F, Carter H Ballentine, Carroll Peter, Etzioni Ruth
Department of Urology, New York University, New York, NY, USA.
Department of Urology, New York University, New York, NY, USA.
Eur Urol. 2014 Jun;65(6):1046-55. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.062. Epub 2014 Jan 9.
Although prostate cancer (PCa) screening reduces the incidence of advanced disease and mortality, trade-offs include overdiagnosis and resultant overtreatment.
To review primary data on PCa overdiagnosis and overtreatment.
Electronic searches were conducted in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and Embase from inception to July 2013 for original articles on PCa overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Supplemental articles were identified through hand searches.
The lead-time and excess-incidence approaches are the main ways used to estimate overdiagnosis in epidemiological studies, with estimates varying widely. The estimated number of PCa cases needed to be diagnosed to save a life has ranged from 48 down to 5 with increasing follow-up. In clinical studies, generally lower rates of overdiagnosis have been reported based on the frequency of low-grade minimal tumors at radical prostatectomy (1.7-46.8%). Autopsy studies have reported PCa in 18.5-38.5%, although not all are low grade or low volume. Factors influencing overdiagnosis include the study population, screening protocol, and background incidence, limiting generalizability between settings. Reported rates of overtreatment vary widely in the literature, although contemporary international studies suggest increasing use of conservative management.
Epidemiological, clinical, and autopsy studies have been used to examine PCa overdiagnosis, with estimates ranging widely from 1.7% to 67%. Correspondingly, estimates of overtreatment vary widely based on patient features and may be declining internationally. Careful patient selection for screening and reducing overtreatment are important to preserve the benefits and reduce the downstream harms of prostate-specific antigen testing. Because all of these estimates are extremely population and context specific, this must be considered when using these data to inform policy.
Screening reduces spread and death from prostate cancer (PCa) but overdiagnoses some low-risk tumors that may not have caused harm. Because treatment has potential side effects, it is critical that not all patients with PCa receive aggressive treatment.
尽管前列腺癌(PCa)筛查可降低晚期疾病的发病率和死亡率,但权衡之处包括过度诊断及由此导致的过度治疗。
综述关于PCa过度诊断和过度治疗的原始数据。
从创刊至2013年7月,在Cochrane对照试验中央注册库、PubMed和Embase中进行电子检索,以查找关于PCa过度诊断和过度治疗的原始文章。通过手工检索确定补充文章。
在流行病学研究中,领先时间法和超额发病率法是用于估计过度诊断的主要方法,估计值差异很大。随着随访时间的增加,为挽救一条生命所需诊断的PCa病例数从48例降至5例不等。在临床研究中,基于根治性前列腺切除术中低级别微小肿瘤的发生率(1.7%-46.8%),报告的过度诊断率通常较低。尸检研究报告PCa的发生率为18.5%-38.5%,尽管并非所有都是低级别或小体积的。影响过度诊断的因素包括研究人群、筛查方案和背景发病率,限制了不同研究背景之间的普遍性。文献中报告的过度治疗率差异很大,尽管当代国际研究表明保守治疗的使用在增加。
流行病学、临床和尸检研究已用于检查PCa的过度诊断,估计值从1.7%到67%不等。相应地,基于患者特征的过度治疗估计值差异很大,并且在国际上可能正在下降。仔细选择筛查患者并减少过度治疗对于保留前列腺特异性抗原检测的益处和减少下游危害很重要。由于所有这些估计都极其依赖人群和具体情况,在使用这些数据为政策提供依据时必须考虑这一点。
筛查可减少前列腺癌(PCa)的扩散和死亡,但会过度诊断一些可能不会造成伤害的低风险肿瘤。由于治疗有潜在的副作用,并非所有PCa患者都接受积极治疗至关重要。