http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/28217/ List of Publications en http://repub.eur.nl/static-eur/img/logo.png http://repub.eur.nl http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/38883/ 2012-09-01T00:00:00Z Objective: To assess the impact of different study designs on outcome data within the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). Methods: Observed data from the Gothenburg centre (effectiveness trial with upfront randomization before informed consent) and the Rotterdam centre (efficacy trial with randomization after informed consent) were compared with expected data, which were retrieved from national cancer registries and life tables. Endpoints were 11-year cumulative prostate cancer (PC) incidence, overall mortality and PC-specific mortality. Results: In Gothenburg, the 11-year PC incidence was higher than predicted (5.8%) in both the intervention (12.4%) and control arms (7.3%). The observed overall mortality was higher than predicted (15.9%) in both the intervention (17.8%) and control arms (18.5%). The observed PC-specific mortality in the intervention arm was 0.56% versus 0.83% in the control arm, while the expected mortality was 0.83%. In Rotterdam, the observed PC incidence in the intervention arm (10.4%) was higher than expected (4.4%). The incidence in the control arm was 4.6%. The observed overall mortality was lower than expected: 13.6% in the intervention arm and 14.0% in the control arm versus an expected mortality of 16.1%. The observed PC-specific mortality was lower than expected (0.65%) in both the intervention (0.27%) and control arms (0.41%). Conclusions: Our results suggest that an efficacy trial with informed consent prior to randomization may have introduced a 'healthy screenee bias'. Therefore, an effectiveness trial with consent after randomization may more accurately estimate the PC-specific mortality reduction if population-based screening is introduced. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/32519/ 2012-05-16T00:00:00Z At first glance, deciding whether to get the PSA screening test for prostate cancer seems to be pretty straightforward and attractive. It’s a simple blood test that can pick up the prostate cancer long before your symptoms appear. After all, your prostate cancer is earlier treated resulting in cure and better outcome. Therefore prostate cancer screening seems to be suitable for public commercials. However, many of the cancers that will be detected by screening are so slow-growing that might never cause problems during mens life. Moreover, their diagnosis by biopsy, and treatment, might be worse than the disease itself. Therefore, prostate cancer screening looks favourable; however, watch out for the prostate cancer bomb. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/32008/ 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z BACKGROUND The prostate may often harbor a prostate cancer (PC) which will not cause morbidity if left untreated. Screening for PC leads to increased detection of these insignificant cancers. Objective of this study is to compare PC detected by PSA screening at subsequent screening rounds and treated by radical prostatectomy (RP) with PC incidentally found in cystoprostatectomy specimens. METHODS Radical prostatectomy specimens of 617 screen-detected PC were compared with 123 PC identified in cystoprostatectomy specimens. Surgical specimens were systematically examined and stage, grade, tumor volume were recorded. Next, we classified PC as clinically significant or insignificant (i.e., tumor volume <0.5 cm3, absence of Gleason pattern 4/5, organ confined). Pathological features of incidentally detected PC were compared with PC detected in subsequent screening rounds and with screen-detected T1c PC. RESULTS Screen-detected PC overall were more often multifocal, larger in volume, more advanced in tumor stage and of higher grade, while the frequency of insignificant PC was lower as compared to those in cystoprostatectomy specimens. This effect became more pronounced during subsequent screening rounds. Screen-detected T1c PC were also more often multifocal (73% vs. 37%) in average fivefold larger (0.85 cm3vs. 0.16 cm3), less often organ confined (81% vs. 94%), and less frequently clinically insignificant (33% vs. 81%). CONCLUSIONS: Screen-detected (T1c) PC treated with RP shows more aggressive features than incidentally found PC. This PSA screening-related selection seems to be mainly driven by tumor volume and-in later screening rounds-by the preferential treatment by prostatectomy of more aggressive PC. Copyright http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/34720/ 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z Background: The rate of decrease in advanced cancers is an estimate for determining prostate cancer (PCa) screening program effectiveness. Objective: Assess the effectiveness of PCa screening programs using a 2- or 4-yr screening interval. Design, setting, and participants: Men aged 55-64 yr were participants at two centers of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer: Gothenburg, Sweden (2-yr screening interval, n = 4202), and Rotterdam, the Netherlands (4-yr screening interval, n = 13 301). We followed participants until the date of PCa, the date of death, or the last follow-up at December 31, 2008, or up to a maximum of 12 yr after initial screening. Potentially life-threatening (advanced) cancer was defined as cancer with at least one of following characteristics: clinical stage ≥T3a, M1, or N1; serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >20.0 ng/ml; or Gleason score ≥8 at biopsy. Intervention: We compared the proportional total (advanced) cancer incidence (screen-detected and interval cases), defined as the ratio of the observed number of (advanced) cancers to the expected numbers of (advanced) cancers based on the control arm of the study. Measurements: The proportional cancer incidence from the second screening round until the end of observation was compared using a 2- or 4-yr screening interval. Results and limitations: From screening round 2 until the end of observation, the proportional cancer incidence was 3.64 in Gothenburg and 3.08 in Rotterdam (relative risk [RR]: 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.33; p = 0.009). The proportional advanced cancer incidence was 0.40 in Gothenburg and 0.69 in Rotterdam (RR: 0.57; 95% CI, 0.33-0.99; p = 0.048); the RR for detection of low-risk PCa was 1.46 (95% CI, 1.25-1.71; p < 0.001). This study was limited by the assumption that PSA testing in the control arm was similar in both centers. Conclusions: A 2-yr screening interval significantly reduced the incidence of advanced PCa; however, the 2-yr interval increased the overall risk of being diagnosed with (low-risk) PCa compared with a 4-yr interval in men aged 55-64 yr. Individualized screening algorithms must be improved to provide the strategy for this issue. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/33216/ 2011-11-01T00:00:00Z http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/31331/ 2011-08-01T00:00:00Z Background: In a screening program, interval cancers are cancers diagnosed between two screening visits. Objective: To assess the disease-specific survival (DSS) of men with prostate cancer (PCa) detected during the screening interval. Design, setting, and participants: Within the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer section Rotterdam, 42 376 men identified from population registries (55-74 yr of age) were randomized to a screening or control arm. The median follow-up was 11 yr. Intervention: Men with prostate-specific antigen ≥3.0 ng/ml were recommended to undergo lateralized sextant biopsy. The screening interval was 4 yr. Measurements: The disease-specific mortality of men with interval cancers was compared with that of men with PCa in the control arm; the secondary end point was overall mortality. An independent committee determined the causes of death. Results and limitations: In the screening arm, 139 men were diagnosed with interval cancer of whom 8 died of the disease. In the control arm, the corresponding numbers were 1149 and 128, respectively. When comparing men with interval cancer to men with PCa in the control arm, no statistically significant difference in disease-specific mortality (hazard ratio [HR]:1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-2.36; p = 0.77) and overall mortality (HR: 0.98; 95% CI, 0.68-1.38; p = 0.90) was found, adjusted for age, prognostic factors, and treatment modality. The follow-up is too limited to address the difference in DSS stratified for screening interval. Conclusions: In the setting of population-based PCa screening at 4-yr intervals, the DSS of men with interval cancer seems to be similar to that of men with PCa in the control arm. Given that interval cancers contribute significantly to PCa mortality, further benefit in DSS in the screening arm may be achieved by decreasing the occurrence of interval cancer. However, the balance between mortality reduction and overdiagnosis should be preserved. Trial registration: ISRCTN49127736. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/31332/ 2011-08-01T00:00:00Z Background: In a screening program, interval cancers are cancers diagnosed between two screening visits. Objective: To assess the disease-specific survival (DSS) of men with prostate cancer (PCa) detected during the screening interval. Design, setting, and participants: Within the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer section Rotterdam, 42 376 men identified from population registries (55-74 yr of age) were randomized to a screening or control arm. The median follow-up was 11 yr. Intervention: Men with prostate-specific antigen ≥3.0 ng/ml were recommended to undergo lateralized sextant biopsy. The screening interval was 4 yr. Measurements: The disease-specific mortality of men with interval cancers was compared with that of men with PCa in the control arm; the secondary end point was overall mortality. An independent committee determined the causes of death. Results and limitations: In the screening arm, 139 men were diagnosed with interval cancer of whom 8 died of the disease. In the control arm, the corresponding numbers were 1149 and 128, respectively. When comparing men with interval cancer to men with PCa in the control arm, no statistically significant difference in disease-specific mortality (hazard ratio [HR]:1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-2.36; p = 0.77) and overall mortality (HR: 0.98; 95% CI, 0.68-1.38; p = 0.90) was found, adjusted for age, prognostic factors, and treatment modality. The follow-up is too limited to address the difference in DSS stratified for screening interval. Conclusions: In the setting of population-based PCa screening at 4-yr intervals, the DSS of men with interval cancer seems to be similar to that of men with PCa in the control arm. Given that interval cancers contribute significantly to PCa mortality, further benefit in DSS in the screening arm may be achieved by decreasing the occurrence of interval cancer. However, the balance between mortality reduction and overdiagnosis should be preserved. Trial registration: ISRCTN49127736. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/31335/ 2011-08-01T00:00:00Z http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/26668/ 2011-07-06T00:00:00Z http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/25532/ 2011-04-06T00:00:00Z We aim to identify and characterize "escapes," men who developed metastasis and/or died from prostate cancer (PCa) despite screening, in the framework of the novel international ESCAPE-project. With this knowledge, the ultimate goal is to improve screening strategy. In this article, we focus on the study cohort of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), section Rotterdam. In all, 21,210 men were randomized to the screening arm of whom 19,950 were actually screened. The screening interval was 4 years. Men with prostate-specific antigen ≥3.0 ng/ml were recommended to undergo lateralized sextant prostate biopsy. The follow-up was complete until January 1, 2009. Of 19,950 screened men, 2,317 were diagnosed with PCa. Of these cancers 1,946 were detected in a screening round and 371 during an interval. The median follow-up was 11.1 years for the whole cohort and 7.3 years for men diagnosed with PCa. In total, we identified 168 escapes among 2,317 cancers (7.3%) within our screening cohort of 19,950 men (0.8%). More than half of these escapes were found in the initial screening round (94 of 168). Possible mechanisms behind escaping are nonattending, inadequate screening tests, the relative long screening interval, the age cut-off at 75 years, and undertreatment. International cooperation is crucial to compare the escapes of our cohort with other study groups participating in the ESCAPE-project which have different, more aggressive screening strategies. Subsequently, we can achieve improvements of the current screening algorithm, which hopefully will further decrease PCa-specific mortality without increasing overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Copyright http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/22776/ 2011-04-01T00:00:00Z Background: The European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) applies a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) cut-off value ≥3.0 ng/ml as an indication for lateralised sextant biopsy. Objective: To analyse the incidence and disease-specific mortality for prostate cancer (PCa) in men with an initial PSA <3.0 ng/ml. Design, setting and participants: From November 1993 to December 1999, a total of 42 376 men identified from population registries in the Rotterdam region (55-74 yr of age) were randomised to an intervention or control arm. A total of 19 950 men were screened during the first screening round. Intervention: A PSA <3.0 ng/ml was below the biopsy threshold. PCa cases were identified at rescreens every 4 yr or as interval cancers. Measurements: Distribution of incidence, aggressiveness, and disease-specific mortality of PCa per PSA range was measured. Causes of death were evaluated by an independent committee, and follow-up was complete until 31 December 2008. Results and limitations: From 1993 to 2008, 915 PCa cases were diagnosed in 15 758 men (5.8%) with an initial PSA <3.0 ng/ml and a median age of 62.3 yr. Median overall follow-up was 11 yr. PCa incidence increased significantly with higher initial PSA levels. Aggressive PCa (clinical stage ≥T2c, Gleason score ≥8, PSA >20 ng/ml, positive lymph nodes, or metastases at diagnosis) was detected in 66 of 733 screen-detected PCa cases (9.0%) and 72 of 182 interval-detected PCa cases (39.6%). Twenty-three PCa deaths occurred in the total population (0.15%), with an increasing risk of PCa mortality in men with higher initial PSA values. Conclusions: The risk of PCa, aggressive PCa and PCa mortality in a screening population with initial PSA <3.0 ng/ml increases significantly with higher initial PSA levels. These results contribute to the risk stratification and individual management of men in PSA-based screening programmes. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/33563/ 2011-01-01T00:00:00Z Purpose The identification of clinically insignificant prostate cancer could help avoid overtreatment. Current criteria for insignificant prostate cancer use a tumor volume threshold of less than 0.5 ml for the index tumor. In this study we reassess this tumor volume threshold for clinically insignificant prostate cancer using an independent data set. Materials and Methods The rate of insignificant prostate cancer was calculated by modeling lifetime risk estimates of prostate cancer diagnosis in screened and nonscreened participants in a randomized prostate cancer screening trial. Using lifetime risk estimates 50.8% of screen detected prostate cancer was calculated to be clinically insignificant and the 49.2% largest tumor volume of 325 prostatectomy specimens was used to determine the threshold tumor volume for insignificant prostate cancer. Because stage and grade represent the strongest determinants of cancer aggressiveness, we also calculated the tumor volume threshold for insignificant cancer after the selection of patients with organ confined prostate cancer without Gleason pattern 4/5. The analyses were performed for total tumor volume and for index tumor volume. Results The minimum threshold tumor volume of the index tumor and total tumor was 0.55 and 0.70 ml, respectively. After accounting for tumor stage and grade we obtained a threshold volume for the index tumor and total tumor of 1.3 and 2.5 ml, respectively. Conclusions We confirmed the original value of the index tumor volume threshold of 0.5 ml for insignificant prostate cancer, and we demonstrated that clinically insignificant prostate cancer may include index Gleason score 6, pT2 tumors with volumes up to at least 1.3 ml. These results suggest a reconsideration of current methods and nomograms used for pretreatment risk assessment. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/21689/ 2010-12-01T00:00:00Z Background: Prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) is considered to be prostate cancer (PCa) specific and highly overexpressed in cancer. Therefore a high PCA3 score should result in a high positive predictive value (PPV) and specificity for a positive biopsy. Objective: Our aim was to reevaluate, retest PCA3, and rebiopsy men with an initial PCA3 ≥100 and no PCa detected and compare the results with a random cohort of men with an initial PCA3 < 100. Design, setting, and participants: We invited men 63-75 yr of age with a PCA3 ≥100 for retesting and a control group with an initial PCA3 < 100 to participate in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer, section Rotterdam. Interventions: Blood and urine sampling were used to determine prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and PCA3. Prostate biopsies were performed if the PSA was ≥2.5 ng/ml and/or the PCA3 score was ≥35. Measurements: We correlated the initial and reevaluated PCA3 scores. Our assessment of the PPV after rebiopsy was based on the newly determined PCA3 score. Results and limitations: After a mean study period of 19 mo, more cases of PCa were detected in rebiopsied men with initial PCA3 scores ≥100 than in the controls with PCA3 scores <100 (30.0% vs 18.8%). Combining initial and rebiopsy data resulted in a PPV of 52.2% in men with PCA3 ≥100. Over time, changes in PSA and PCA3 levels were quite different. Conclusions: In spite of our rescreened population, PPV and specificity were comparable with all reported studies of men with PCA3 scores ≥100. These findings do not explain why these PCA3 scores were excessively high in spite of the absence of biopsy-detectable PCa. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/22978/ 2010-12-01T00:00:00Z Objectives To study the difference between the disease-specific and excess mortality rate in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer section Rotterdam. Methods A total of 42,376 men were randomized to systematic screening or usual care. The excess number of deaths was defined as the difference between the observed number of deaths in the prostate cancer (PC) patients and the expected number of deaths up to 31 December 2006. The expected number was derived from mortality of all study participants before a possible diagnosis with PC. The disease-specific mortality rate was based on the number of men who died from PC. The excess mortality rate based on the arm-specific excess number of deaths and the disease-specific mortality rate were compared between the two study arms. Results The overall mortality rate was not significantly different between the intervention and the control arms of the study: RR 1.02 (95% CI 0.98-1.07). The disease-specific mortality rate was 0.42 men per 1000 person-years in the intervention and 0.48 men per 1000 person-years in the control arm: RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.64-1.17). The excess mortality rate was 0.40 per 1000 personyears in the intervention arm and 0.61 men per 1000 person-years in the control arm, and the RR for excess mortality was 0.66 (95% CI 0.39-1.13). Conclusions In contrast to the disease-specific mortality rates an increased difference in the excess mortality rates was observed between the two arms. This observation may be due to a systematic underestimation of the disease-specific deaths, and/or an additional disease-related mortality that is measured by an excess mortality analysis but not by a disease-specific mortality. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/21393/ 2010-11-01T00:00:00Z Background: To assess the agreement between the causes of death assigned by a blinded and uniform review panel of the Rotterdam section of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer and the official vital statistics and to explore the possible effect of the use of either of these two sources on the outcome of the screening trial. Methods: A total of 670 deaths amongst men with prostate cancer, reviewed by the causes of death committee (CODC) up to 31st December 2006 were included in this study. The kappa statistics with confidence intervals (CI), sensitivity and specificity of the official statistics were determined, with the CODC considered the gold standard. The rate ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for prostate cancer mortality, official statistics relative to CODC, were calculated following the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. Results: The overall concordance and the kappa between official statistics and the CODC were 90.6% and 0.76 (0.71-0.82), remaining comparable when only the CODC category definitely prostate cancer was applied, with the sensitivity of official statistics increasing from 88.3% to 91.3% and specificity hardly changing (91.3% and 90.5%). High specificity and lower sensitivity is observed in the screening arm, whilst the opposite was seen in the control arm in men aged 55-69 and 70-74 years at entry. Considerable lower false positive rate was seen for both age groups in the screening arm (3.9% and 4.7%) compared to the control arm (8.4% and 14.3%). A statistically significant excess of prostate cancer death was observed for the official statistics in the age group 70-74 years, 1.53 (1.07-2.19), whilst it was not significant for men aged 55-69 at entry, 1.06 (0.83-1.36). Conclusion: In the Rotterdam ERSPC section, official statistics tended to overreport prostate cancer as an underlying cause of death, particularly in the age group 70-plus in the control arm, which would overestimate the true effect in favour of screening. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/27465/ 2010-10-15T00:00:00Z BACKGROUND: The benefits of prostate cancer screening on an individual level remain unevaluated. METHODS: Between 1993 and 1999, a total of 43,987 men, aged 55-74 years, were included in the intervention arm of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) section in the Netherlands, Sweden, and Finland. A total of 42,503 men, aged 55-74 years, were included in a clinical population in Northern Ireland. Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <20.0 ng/mL was measured in all men at study entry. All men were followed for prostate cancer incidence and causes of death until December 31, 2006. RESULTS: The adjusted absolute difference in prostate cancer specific mortality between the intervention population and the clinical population increased with increasing PSA level at study entry, ie, 0.05 per 10,000 person-years for men who had a serum PSA level of 0.0-1.9 ng/mL and 8.8 per 10,000 person-years for men who had a serum PSA level of 10-19.9 ng/mL. To evaluate the risks of early detection, the number needed to investigate (NNI) and number needed to treat (NNT) to save 1 death from prostate cancer were calculated. Both NNI and NNT were higher for those who had lower PSA levels at study entry. The NNI was 24,642 men for patients who had a serum PSA level of 0.0-1.9 ng/mL and was 133 men for patients who had a serum PSA level of 10-19.9 ng/mL; the NNT was 724 men for patients who had a serum PSA level of 0.0-1.9 ng/mL and was 60 men for patients with a serum PSA level of 10-19.9 ng/mL. CONCLUSIONS: For men with a low serum PSA level, the benefits of aggressive investigation and treatment may be limited because they are associated with a large increase in cumulative incidence and potential overtreatment. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/20854/ 2010-09-01T00:00:00Z The objective of this study was to determine whether screening for prostate cancer (PC) reduces PC mortality and, if so, whether the required criteria to be introduced as a population-based screening program are satisfied. A literature review was conducted through electronic scientific databases. The screening tests, that is, PSA and digital rectal examination, have limited sensitivity and specificity for detecting PC; screening produces a beneficial stage shift and reduces PC mortality. Nevertheless, PC screening causes a large increase in the cumulative incidence, and the understanding of the economic cost and quality-of-life parameters are limited. PC screening cannot be justified yet in the context of a public health policy. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/28119/ 2010-09-01T00:00:00Z Objectives: To investigate the impact of different PSA testing policies and health-care systems on prostate cancer incidence and mortality in two countries with similar populations, the Republic of Ireland (RoI) and Northern Ireland (NI). Methods: Population-level data on PSA tests, prostate biopsies and prostate cancer cases 1993-2005 and prostate cancer deaths 1979-2006 were compiled. Annual percentage change (APC) was estimated by joinpoint regression. Results: Prostate cancer rates were similar in both areas in 1994 but increased rapidly in RoI compared to NI. The PSA testing rate increased sharply in RoI (APC = +23.3%), and to a lesser degree in NI (APC = +9.7%) to reach 412 and 177 tests per 1,000 men in 2004, respectively. Prostatic biopsy rates rose in both countries, but were twofold higher in RoI. Cancer incidence rates rose significantly, mirroring biopsy trends, in both countries reaching 440 per 100,000 men in RoI in 2004 compared to 294 in NI. Median age at diagnosis was lower in RoI (71 years) compared to NI (73 years) (p < 0.01) and decreased significantly over time in both countries. Mortality rates declined from 1995 in both countries (APC = -1.5% in RoI, -1.3% in NI) at a time when PSA testing was not widespread. Conclusions: Prostatic biopsy rates, rather than PSA testing per se, were the main driver of prostate cancer incidence. Because mortality decreases started before screening became widespread in RoI, and mortality remained low in NI, PSA testing is unlikely to be the explanation for declining mortality. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/20640/ 2010-07-01T00:00:00Z http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/27946/ 2010-05-01T00:00:00Z Background: The independent prognostic value of tumour volume in radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens is controversial, and it remains a matter of debate whether pathologists should report a measure of tumour volume. In addition, tumour volume might be of value in substaging of pathologic tumour stage (pT2) prostate cancer (PCa). Objective: To assess the prognostic value of PCa tumour volume. Design, setting, and participants: The cohort consisted of 344 participants in the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), Rotterdam section, whose PCa was treated with RP. Mean time of follow-up was 96.2 mo. Measurements: Tumour volume was measured in totally embedded RP specimens with a morphometric, computer-assisted method and assessed as a continuous variable, as relative tumour volume (tumour volume divided by prostate volume), and in a binary fashion (≥0.5 ml or <0.5 ml). These variables were related to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, local recurrence, or distant metastasis and PCa-related mortality using univariate and multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses. The analyses were repeated in the subgroup with pT2 tumours. Results and limitations: Tumour volume was related to tumour stage, Gleason score, seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), and surgical margin status. In univariate analyses, tumour volume and relative tumour volume were predictive for all outcome variables. In multivariable analyses, including age, tumour stage, Gleason score, SVI, and surgical margin status, neither tumour volume nor relative volume were independent predictors of progression or mortality. Tumour volume ≥0.5 ml was predictive for PSA recurrence and local and/or distant progression in univariate analyses but not in multivariable analyses. Tumour volume was not predictive for recurrence or mortality in univariate or multivariable analyses in the pT2 subgroup. Conclusions: Tumour volume did not add prognostic value to routinely assessed pathologic parameters. Therefore, there seems to be little reason to routinely measure tumour volume in RP specimens. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/19949/ 2010-03-01T00:00:00Z BACKGROUND: Strategies of active surveillance (AS) of low-risk screen-detected prostate cancer have emerged, because the balance between survival outcomes and quality of life issues when radically treating these malignancies is disputable. Delay before radical treatment caused by active surveillance may be associated with an impaired chance of curability. METHODS: Men diagnosed with low-risk (T1c/T2; prostate-specific antigen [PSA] = <10.0; PSA density, <0.2 ng/mL; Gleason score, 3 + 3=6; 1-2 positive biopsies) prostate cancer in the Swedish section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer who received radical prostatectomy (RP) were studied. One group received immediate RP, whereas another group received delayed RP after an initial period of expectant management. These groups were compared regarding histopathological and biochemical outcomes, correcting for baseline differences. RESULTS: Mean follow-up after diagnosis was 5.7 years (standard deviation [SD], 3.2). The immediate RP group (n = 158) received RP a mean of 0.5 (SD, 0.2) years after diagnosis; the delayed RP group (n =69) received RP after 2.6 (SD, 2.0) years (P < .001). After adjustment for small baseline dissimilarities, no differences in RP frequencies of Gleason score >6 (odds ratio [OR], 1.54; P = .221), capsular penetration (OR, 2.45; P = .091), positive margins (OR, 1.34; P = .445), RP tumor volume (difference, 0.099; P = .155), or biochemical progression rates (P = .185, P = .689) were found between groups, although all data were in favor of immediate RP. CONCLUSIONS: With limited patient numbers available for analysis, differences in intermediate outcomes between immediate RP and delayed RP were nonsignificant. The delayed RP group may be subject to a selection bias. Prospective evaluation of active surveillance protocols is essential. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/27947/ 2010-02-01T00:00:00Z Background: The appropriate way of biopsying a prostate remains controversial. Is sextant biopsy still adequate with repeat screening? Objective: Within the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), lateralized sextant biopsies were applied. In this analysis we use distant end points to study the fate of prostate cancers (PCa) potentially missed by initial biopsies. Design, setting, and participants: This retrospective study included 19 970 men ages 55-74 identified from the Rotterdam population registry and screened repeatedly for PCa between 1993 and 2005. PCa detected later in men with initially negative biopsies were considered as missed. Rescreening every 4 yr and a complete follow-up of 11 yr allowed an inventory of progressive and deadly disease in these men. Intervention: Sextant biopsies initially, later lateralized, in screen-positive men. Measurements: The fate of PCa potentially missed by initial sextant biopsies in terms of progression-free and PCa-specific survival were the main outcome measures. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to evaluate differences between subgroups. Results and limitations: In 3056 men with negative biopsies at the first screen, 287 PCa were subsequently detected. Of these 287 cases, 26 developed progressive disease and 7 died of PCa. Poor outcomes were encountered mainly in 20 interval cases. The seven PCa deaths in men with initially negative biopsies amounted to only 0.03% compared to the 0.35% PCa death rate in the whole population of 19 970 men. Limitations include the retrospective character of this analysis. Conclusions: The number of potentially missed cancers with a poor outcome in terms of progression-free survival and deaths from PCa is very low. Despite some limitations, our data show that lateralized sextant biopsy is not obsolete if repeated screening is applied. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/20155/ 2010-01-01T00:00:00Z Tumor volume was measured in 344 totally embedded radical prostatectomy specimens of screen detected prostate cancer cases. In univariate analyses, tumor volume was predictive for biochemical and local progression, metastasis and mortality. In multivariable analyses, tumor volume did not add prognostic value to routinely assessed pathological parameters, like tumor stage, Gleason score, seminal vesicle invasion and surgical margin status. Therefore, there seems to be little reason to routinely measure tumor volume in RP specimens. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/21846/ 2010-01-01T00:00:00Z Context: We addressed the question whether the change of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in men who use 5α-reductase inhibitor (5-ARI) dutasteride is sensitive for the detection of aggressive prostate cancer (PCa). Objective: The case of a man using dutasteride diagnosed with Gleason 7 transition zone cancer at biopsy indicated by a rising PSA is described. The following issues are discussed: (1) Is a rise of PSA in patients using dutasteride predictive of aggressive PCa in men with prior negative biopsies? (2) Is it safe not to biopsy men using dutasteride who do not show a rising PSA? (3) How can we avoid potentially unnecessary biopsies in men using dutasteride without a rising PSA? Evidence acquisition: We reviewed the recent literature addressing our objective that relates to two studies: the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial and the Reduction by Dutasteride of Prostate Cancer Events trial. Evidence synthesis: In men using dutasteride, the positive predictive value/detection rate of Gleason 7-10 PCa is 13.2% and 4.0% for men with and without a rising PSA, respectively. However, a substantial proportion of Gleason 7-10 cases (42.9%) would be missed if a rising PSA was used as the only biopsy indication. Currently available data do not provide selective mechanisms to diagnose these cancers. Conclusions: A rising PSA for a patient using dutasteride should be an indication for prostate biopsies. Currently, in the case of stable PSA a biopsy may still be considered. Options for a selective approach are therefore suggested in this review to avoid unnecessary biopsies and to achieve a more selective PCa detection in men on 5-ARI treatment. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/22148/ 2010-01-01T00:00:00Z PSA levels have shown daily and seasonal variation, although data are conflicting regarding the season with higher PSA levels and the clinical relevance of this. We assessed the correlation of total PSA levels with meteorological data on a daily, weekly, monthly and seasonal basis. Data from 53 224 men aged 45-74 years, with an initial PSA <10.0 ng ml-1 were correlated with temperature (°C), duration of bright sunshine (hours) and rainfall (mm). There was seasonal variation in PSA levels, with median PSA being higher in spring compared with other seasons (1.18 vs 1.10 ng ml-1, P=0.004). Seasonal variation was not apparent when PSA levels were age-adjusted (P=0.112). Total PSA was not correlated with daily, weekly or monthly hours of sunshine, rainfall or mean temperature. In contrast, age-adjusted PSA varied with weekday, with higher PSA levels on Thursday and Friday compared with other days (1.16 vs 1.10 ng ml-1, respectively). On multivariate analysis, only age predicted for PSA levels >3.0 ng ml-1. In conclusion, PSA levels did show seasonal variation, although there was no direct correlation between PSA and any meteorological parameter. The degree of seasonal variation is small and the decision to proceed to prostate biopsy should be independent of season or weather parameters.Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases advance online publication, 26 October 2010; doi:10.1038/pcan.2010.37. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/28101/ 2010-01-01T00:00:00Z Background: To estimate the benefits of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer (Pca) metastasis and Pca-specific mortality, we compared two populations with a well-defined difference in intensity of screening. Methods: Between 1997 and 1999, a total of 11,970 men, aged 55-74 years, were included in the intervention arm of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) section Rotterdam. Control population consisted of 133,287 men, aged 55-74 years, between 1998 and 1999 in Northern Ireland (NI). Men were followed for Pca incidence, Pca metastasis and cause of death until 31st December 2006. Results: Median age in both groups was 63 years at study entry (p = 0.184). In Rotterdam 94.2% of men and in NI 6% of men underwent PSA testing. In Rotterdam, 1153 men (9.6%) were diagnosed with Pca with median baseline PSA of 5.1 ng/ml. In NI, 3962 men (3.0%, p < 0.001) were diagnosed with Pca with median baseline PSA of 18.0 ng/ml (p < 0.001). The relative risk of Pca metastasis during observation in the intervention population compared to control population was 0.47 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.35-0.63; p < 0.001). The relative risk of Pca-specific mortality was also lower in the intervention population compared to the control population after a median follow-up of 8.5 years: 0.63 (95% CI, 0.45-0.88; p = 0.008); absolute mortality reduction was 1.8 deaths per 1000 men. Conclusions: A relative reduction in Pca metastasis of 53% and Pca mortality of 37% was observed in the intervention population after 8.5 years of observation. The impact of overdiagnosis, quality of life benefits and cost-effectiveness need to be assessed before population-based PSA screening can be recommended. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/14593/ 2008-11-01T00:00:00Z OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential problem that different tools for predicting a positive outcome of prostate biopsy can produce divergent outcomes in the same man, by comparing the risk calculators based on the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) and the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) range of 0.2-30.0 ng/mL, the prediction curves of 'virtual' standard study participants were evaluated using both prediction tools. The effects of prostate volume, digital rectal examination, transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS), previous negative biopsy, family history, race, and age were also assessed. RESULTS: Important differences in underlying study design and populations between the PCPT and ERSPC cause an essential discrepancy between the risk calculators. In the PCPT there were few biopsies in the higher PSA ranges, and in the ERSPC in the lower PSA ranges. Both risk indicators have incorporated some variables that are not used in the other, because they were insignificant in multivariate analysis. TRUS and especially prostate volume (not available in the PCPT) have a considerably larger effect on predictions in comparable PSA ranges than race, age, family history of prostate cancer, and previous negative biopsy (indicators that were excluded in ERSPC). CONCLUSIONS: Before using risk calculators users must consider the properties of the underlying populations and what are the included or unavailable risk factors, and compare these to the patient. When these prerequisites are disregarded, dissimilarities will result in grossly inaccurate predictions for individual patients. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/30226/ 2008-07-01T00:00:00Z Background: The pharmacokinetics and analgesic effects of intravenous and rectal paracetamol were compared in nonventilated infants after craniofacial surgery in a double-blind placebo controlled study. Methods: During surgery all infants (6 months-2 years) received a rectal loading dose of 40 mg·kg-1paracetamol 2 h before anticipated extubation. On admittance to the pediatric surgical ICU, the children were randomized to receive either a 15 min intravenous infusion of 40 mg·kg-1propacetamol, a prodrug of paracetamol, or 20 mg·kg-1paracetamol rectally every 6 h. A population pharmacokinetic analysis of the paracetamol plasma concentration time-profiles was undertaken using nonlinear mixed effects models. The visual analogue scale (VAS) (score 0-10 cm) and COMFORT Behavior scale (score 6-30) were used to monitor analgesia in the 24-h period following surgery. Results: Twelve infants received intravenous propacetamol and 14 paracetamol suppositories. Paracetamol pharmacokinetics were described according to a two-compartmental model with linear disposition. Pharmacokinetic parameters were standardized to a 70 kg person using allometric '1/4 power' models. Parameter estimates were: absorption half-life from the rectum 4.6 h, propacetamol hydrolysis half-life 0.028 h, clearance 12 l·h-1·70 kg-1, intercompartmental clearance 116 l·h-1·70 kg-1, central and peripheral volume of distribution 7.9 and 44 l·70 kg-1, respectively. During the 24-h study period 22 infants exhibited VAS scores <4 cm, which was considered a cutoff point. On single occasions four patients, two in each group, exhibited a VAS score ≥4 cm. Nine patients in the rectal treatment group and three patients in the intravenous treatment group received midazolam for COMFORT-B scores exceeding 17 (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Intravenous propacetamol proved to be more effective than rectal paracetamol in infants after craniofacial surgery. Midazolam was more frequently administered to patients receiving paracetamol suppositories, indicating that these children experienced more distress, possibly caused by pain.