Latest & greatest articles for prostate cancer screening

The Trip Database is a leading resource to help health professionals find trustworthy answers to their clinical questions. Users can access the latest research evidence and guidance to answer their clinical questions. We have a large collection of systematic reviews, clinical guidelines, regulatory guidance, clinical trials and many other forms of evidence. If you wanted the latest trusted evidence on prostate cancer screening or other clinical topics then use Trip today.

This page lists the very latest high quality evidence on prostate cancer screening and also the most popular articles. Popularity measured by the number of times the articles have been clicked on by fellow users in the last twelve months.

What is Trip?

Trip is a clinical search engine designed to allow users to quickly and easily find and use high-quality research evidence to support their practice and/or care.

Trip has been online since 1997 and in that time has developed into the internet’s premier source of evidence-based content. Our motto is ‘Find evidence fast’ and this is something we aim to deliver for every single search.

As well as research evidence we also allow clinicians to search across other content types including images, videos, patient information leaflets, educational courses and news.

For further information on Trip click on any of the questions/sections on the left-hand side of this page. But if you still have questions please contact us via jon.brassey@tripdatabase.com

Top results for prostate cancer screening

21. Recommendations on screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen test

Recommendations on screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen test 25349003 2014 11 04 2015 01 22 2017 02 20 1488-2329 186 16 2014 Nov 04 CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne CMAJ Recommendations on screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen test. 1225-34 10.1503/cmaj.140703 Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care Bell Neil N Department of Family Medicine (Bell), University of Alberta (...) Prostate-Specific Antigen AIM IM CMAJ. 2014 Nov 4;186(16):1201-2 25349002 BMJ. 2012;345:e6572 23137819 Cancer. 2003 Apr 1;97(7):1653-62 12655522 Lancet Oncol. 2011 Sep;12(9):891-9 21821474 Urology. 2012 Dec;80(6):1319-25 23107099 JAMA. 2006 Dec 13;296(22):2683-93 17164454 World J Urol. 2007 Mar;25(1):3-9 17364211 J Urol. 2009 Apr;181(4):1615-21; discussion 1621 19233435 N Engl J Med. 2004 May 27;350(22):2239-46 15163773 Med Care. 2001 Mar;39(3):243-53 11242319 Ann Intern Med. 2012 Jul 17;157(2):135-6 22801675 Can Fam

EvidenceUpdates2014 Full Text: Link to full Text with Trip Pro

22. A simple schema for informed decision-making about prostate cancer screening

A simple schema for informed decision-making about prostate cancer screening 25222389 2014 09 16 2014 11 12 2016 10 19 1539-3704 161 6 2014 Sep 16 Annals of internal medicine Ann. Intern. Med. A simple schema for informed decision making about prostate cancer screening. 441-2 10.7326/M14-0151 Vickers Andrew J AJ Edwards Kelly K Cooperberg Matthew R MR Mushlin Alvin I AI eng 1-U48-DP-000050 DP NCCDPHP CDC HHS United States UL1 RR024996 RR NCRR NIH HHS United States P50-CA92629 CA NCI NIH HHS (...) Primary Health Care Prostate-Specific Antigen blood Prostatic Neoplasms diagnosis NIHMS683463 PMC4412472 2014 9 16 6 0 2014 9 16 6 0 2014 11 13 6 0 ppublish 25222389 1905132 10.7326/M14-0151 PMC4412472 NIHMS683463

Annals of Internal Medicine2014 Full Text: Link to full Text with Trip Pro

23. Self-screening for prostate cancer: ban in France is justified

Self-screening for prostate cancer: ban in France is justified Prescrire IN ENGLISH - Spotlight ''Self-screening for prostate cancer: ban in France is justified'', 1 September 2013 {1} {1} {1} | | > > > Self-screening for prostate cancer: ban in France is justified Spotlight Every month, the subjects in Prescrire’s Spotlight. 100 most recent :  |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |  Spotlight Self-screening for prostate cancer (...) : ban in France is justified Screening for prostate cancer by measuring PSA levels presents an unfavourable harm-benefit balance. Measuring the level of the prostate specific antigen (PSA) in the blood is used in prostate cancer screening. In September 2012, the French Health Products Safety Agency banned the sale of PSA self-testing kits in France. Used in a non-medical environment, particularly in the home, these tests measure PSA levels in the blood from a drop of capillary blood. Independently

Prescrire2014

24. Influence of blood prostate specific antigen levels at age 60 on benefits and harms of prostate cancer screening: population based cohort study.

Influence of blood prostate specific antigen levels at age 60 on benefits and harms of prostate cancer screening: population based cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative risks of prostate cancer incidence, metastasis, and mortality associated with screening by serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels at age 60. DESIGN: Population based cohort study. SETTING: General male population of Sweden taking part in a screening trial in Gothenburg or participating in a cardiovascular (...) study, the Malmö Preventive Project. PARTICIPANTS: The screened group consisted of 1756 men aged 57.5-62.5 participating in the screening arm of the Gothenburg randomized prostate cancer screening trial since 1995. The unscreened group consisted of 1162 men, born in 1921, participating in the Malmö Preventive Project, with PSA levels measured retrospectively in stored blood samples from 1981. INTERVENTION: PSA screening versus no screening. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence rate ratios for the effect

BMJ2014

25. Screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen test: a review of current evidence.

Screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen test: a review of current evidence. IMPORTANCE: Prostate cancer screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To review evidence from randomized trials and related modeling studies examining the effect of PSA screening vs no screening on prostate cancer-specific mortality and to suggest an approach balancing potential benefits and harms. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: MEDLINE, EMBASE (...) Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC)-dominate the evidence regarding PSA screening. The former trial demonstrated an increase in cancer incidence in the screening group (relative risk [RR], 1.12; 95% CI, 1.07-1.17) but no cancer-specific mortality benefit to PSA screening after 13-year follow-up (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.87-1.36). The ERSPC demonstrated an increase in cancer incidence with screening (RR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.57-1.69) and an improvement in the risk of prostate cancer-specific

JAMA2014

26. [Summary of the exploration of the scientific literature on the effects of prostate cancer screening decision aids for the expert panel of the Collège des médecins du Québec]

[Summary of the exploration of the scientific literature on the effects of prostate cancer screening decision aids for the expert panel of the Collège des médecins du Québec] Résumé de l'exploration de la littérature scientifique sur les effets des outils d'aide à la décision pour les patients portant sur le dépistage du cancer de la prostate pour le comité d'experts du Collège des médecins du Québec [Summary of the exploration of the scientific literature on the effects of prostate cancer (...) screening decision aids for the expert panel of the Collège des médecins du Québec] Résumé de l'exploration de la littérature scientifique sur les effets des outils d'aide à la décision pour les patients portant sur le dépistage du cancer de la prostate pour le comité d'experts du Collège des médecins du Québec [Summary of the exploration of the scientific literature on the effects of prostate cancer screening decision aids for the expert panel of the Collège des médecins du Québec] Beaulieu M-D

Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database.2014

27. Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up.

Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. 25108889 2014 12 08 2014 12 15 2016 10 19 1474-547X 384 9959 2014 Dec 06 Lancet (London, England) Lancet Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. 2027-35 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60525-0 S0140-6736(14)60525-0 The European Randomised study (...) of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) has shown significant reductions in prostate cancer mortality after 9 years and 11 years of follow-up, but screening is controversial because of adverse events such as overdiagnosis. We provide updated results of mortality from prostate cancer with follow-up to 2010, with analyses truncated at 9, 11, and 13 years. ERSPC is a multicentre, randomised trial with a predefined centralised database, analysis plan, and core age group (55-69 years), which assesses

Lancet2014 Full Text: Link to full Text with Trip Pro

28. Cohort study: A targeted approach reduces prostate cancer-specific (PSA) screening harms while preserving benefits

Cohort study: A targeted approach reduces prostate cancer-specific (PSA) screening harms while preserving benefits A targeted approach reduces prostate cancer-specific (PSA) screening harms while preserving benefits | Evidence-Based Medicine This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Log in using your username and password For personal accounts OR managers of institutional accounts Username * Password * your user name or password? Search (...) for this keyword Search for this keyword Main menu Log in using your username and password For personal accounts OR managers of institutional accounts Username * Password * your user name or password? You are here A targeted approach reduces prostate cancer-specific (PSA) screening harms while preserving benefits Article Text Prevention Cohort study A targeted approach reduces prostate cancer-specific (PSA) screening harms while preserving benefits Amanda Black Statistics from Altmetric.com No Altmetric data

Evidence-Based Medicine (Requires free registration)2014

29. Decision Making in Prostate Cancer Screening Using Decision Aids vs Usual Care: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Decision Making in Prostate Cancer Screening Using Decision Aids vs Usual Care: A Randomized Clinical Trial 23896732 2013 12 31 2014 01 16 2016 12 15 2168-6114 173 18 2013 Oct 14 JAMA internal medicine JAMA Intern Med Decision making in prostate cancer screening using decision aids vs usual care: a randomized clinical trial. 1704-12 The conflicting recommendations for prostate cancer (PCa) screening and the mixed messages communicated to the public about screening effectiveness make it critical (...) aid (n = 628), web-based interactive decision aid (n = 625), or usual care (UC) (n = 626). Prostate cancer knowledge, decisional conflict, decisional satisfaction, and whether participants underwent PCa screening. Of 4794 eligible men approached, 1893 were randomized. At each follow-up assessment, univariate and multivariable analyses indicated that both decision aids resulted in significantly improved PCa knowledge and reduced decisional conflict compared with UC (all P <.001). At 1 month

EvidenceUpdates2013 Full Text: Link to full Text with Trip Pro

30. Influence of study features and methods on overdiagnosis estimates in breast and prostate cancer screening.

Influence of study features and methods on overdiagnosis estimates in breast and prostate cancer screening. Knowledge of the likelihood that a screening-detected case of cancer has been overdiagnosed is vitally important to make treatment decisions and develop screening policy. An overdiagnosed case is an excess case detected by screening. Estimates of the frequency of overdiagnosis in breast and prostate cancer screening vary greatly across studies. This article identifies features (...) of overdiagnosis studies that influence results and shows their effect by using published research. First, different ways to define and measure overdiagnosis are considered. Second, contextual features and how they affect overdiagnosis estimates are examined. Third, the effect of estimation approach is discussed. Many studies use excess incidence under screening as a proxy for overdiagnosis. Others use statistical models to make inferences about lead time or natural history and then derive the corresponding

Annals of Internal Medicine2013 Full Text: Link to full Text with Trip Pro

31. Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Guidance Statement From the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians.

Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Guidance Statement From the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians. DESCRIPTION: Prostate cancer is an important health problem in men. It rarely causes death in men younger than 50 years; most deaths associated with it occur in men older than 75 years. The benefits of screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test are outweighed by the harms for most men. Prostate cancer never becomes clinically significant in a patient's (...) lifetime in a considerable proportion of men with prostate cancer detected with the PSA test. They will receive no benefit and are subject to substantial harms from the treatment of prostate cancer. The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guidance statement for clinicians by assessing current prostate cancer screening guidelines developed by other organizations. ACP believes that it is more valuable to provide clinicians with a rigorous review of available guidelines rather than develop

Annals of Internal Medicine2013

33. Systematic review: Review of evidence concerning PSA screening for prostate cancer has limitations as basis for policy development

Systematic review: Review of evidence concerning PSA screening for prostate cancer has limitations as basis for policy development Review of evidence concerning PSA screening for prostate cancer has limitations as basis for policy development | Evidence-Based Medicine This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Log in using your username and password For personal accounts OR managers of institutional accounts Username * Password * your user (...) name or password? Search for this keyword Search for this keyword Main menu Log in using your username and password For personal accounts OR managers of institutional accounts Username * Password * your user name or password? You are here Review of evidence concerning PSA screening for prostate cancer has limitations as basis for policy development Article Text Diagnosis Systematic review Review of evidence concerning PSA screening for prostate cancer has limitations as basis for policy development

Evidence-Based Medicine (Requires free registration)2013

34. Prostate cancer screening: a review of the guidelines

Prostate cancer screening: a review of the guidelines Prostate cancer screening: a review of the guidelines Prostate cancer screening: a review of the guidelines CADTH Record Status This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA. No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database. Citation CADTH. Prostate cancer screening: a review of the guidelines. Ottawa: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (...) (CADTH). Rapid Response - Summary with Critical Appraisal. 2013 Authors' conclusions Ten North American guidelines on prostate cancer screening were included in the review. The ten guidelines agreed on recommending prostate cancer screening for men but the age at which screening was recommended differed between guidelines. Six guidelines gave positive recommendations for using PSA-based screening, while one guideline recommended against this practice. This disagreement was due to difference

Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database.2013

35. Guidance Statement: Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Guidance Statement from the American College of Physicians

Guidance Statement: Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Guidance Statement from the American College of Physicians Guidance Statement on Screening for Prostate Cancer | Annals of Internal Medicine | American College of Physicians '); } Sign in below to access your subscription for full content INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN | You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account INSTITUTIONAL SIGN IN | | Subscribe to Annals of Internal Medicine . You will be directed (...) to acponline.org to complete your purchase. Search Clinical Guidelines | 21 May 2013 Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Guidance Statement From the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians Free Amir Qaseem, MD, PhD, MHA; Michael J. Barry, MD; Thomas D. Denberg, MD, PhD; Douglas K. Owens, MD, MS; Paul Shekelle, MD, PhD; for the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians ( ) Amir Qaseem, MD, PhD, MHA From the American College of Physicians, Philadelphia

American College of Physicians2013

36. Population screening for prostate cancer: an overview of available studies and meta-analysis

Population screening for prostate cancer: an overview of available studies and meta-analysis Population screening for prostate cancer: an overview of available studies and meta-analysis Population screening for prostate cancer: an overview of available studies and meta-analysis Lumen N, Fonteyne V, De Meerleert G, Ost P, Villeirs G, Mottrie A, De Visschere P, De Troyer B, Oosterlinck W CRD summary The authors concluded that prostate cancer screening was associated with a significant increase (...) in diagnosis of prostate cancer, diagnosis within a more localised stage and of less aggressive tumours. The authors' conclusions reflect the evidence presented, but potential biases, unclear quality of the included trials and unexplained heterogeneity between them suggests that the reliability of these conclusions is uncertain. Authors' objectives To evaluate the effect of population-based screening on the incidence of prostate cancer, prostate cancer tumour grade and stage, prostate cancer mortality

DARE.2012

37. Periodic PSA-based screening in men 55 to 69 years of age reduced prostate cancer mortality.

Periodic PSA-based screening in men 55 to 69 years of age reduced prostate cancer mortality. ACP Journal Club. Periodic PSA-based screening in men 55 to 69 years of age reduced prostate cancer mortality. - PubMed - NCBI Warning: The NCBI web site requires JavaScript to function. Search database Search term Search Result Filters Format Summary Summary (text) Abstract Abstract (text) MEDLINE XML PMID List Apply Choose Destination File Clipboard Collections E-mail Order My Bibliography Citation (...) manager Format Create File 1 selected item: 22801696 Format MeSH and Other Data E-mail Subject Additional text E-mail Add to Clipboard Add to Collections Order articles Add to My Bibliography Generate a file for use with external citation management software. Create File 2012 Jul 17;157(2):JC2-4. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-2-201207170-02004. ACP Journal Club. Periodic PSA-based screening in men 55 to 69 years of age reduced prostate cancer mortality. . Comment on [N Engl J Med. 2012] PMID: 22801696

Annals of Internal Medicine2012

38. Screening for Prostate Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Screening for Prostate Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. DESCRIPTION: Update of the 2008 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation statement on screening for prostate cancer. METHODS: The USPSTF reviewed new evidence on the benefits and harms of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer, as well as the benefits and harms of treatment of localized prostate cancer. RECOMMENDATION: The USPSTF recommends against PSA (...) -based screening for prostate cancer (grade D recommendation).This recommendation applies to men in the general U.S. population, regardless of age. This recommendation does not include the use of the PSA test for surveillance after diagnosis or treatment of prostate cancer; the use of the PSA test for this indication is outside the scope of the USPSTF.

Annals of Internal Medicine2012

40. Screening for prostate cancer: a review of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

Screening for prostate cancer: a review of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Screening for prostate cancer: a review of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Screening for prostate cancer: a review of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Chou R, Croswell JM, Dana T, Bougatsos C, Blazina I, Fu R, Gleitsmann K, Koenig HC, Lam C, Maltz A, Rugge B, Lin K CRD summary This review concluded that it was uncertain whether (...) prostate-specific antigen-based screening reduced prostate cancer mortality. Screening was associated with false-positive results and adverse events related to subsequent evaluation and treatment. The authors' conclusions seem appropriate, although limitations in review methods mean some relevant studies could have been missed. Authors' objectives To update the 2002 and 2008 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) evidence reviews on screening and treatments for prostate cancer. Searching MEDLINE and the Cochrane

DARE.2012