Prostate cancer screening

African Americans' Perceptions of Prostate-Specific Antigen Prostate Cancer Screening. In 2012, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force released a hotly debated recommendation against prostate-specific antigen testing for all men. The present research examines African Americans' beliefs about their susceptibility to prostate cancer (PCa) and the effectiveness of prostate-specific antigen testing in the context of the controversy surrounding this recommendation.This study used a qualitative (...) design to examine perceptions regarding susceptibility and screening. Data were collected at a community health center and three predominantly African American churches in North Carolina. Study participants were 46 African American men and women who attended one of four "listening sessions" for pretesting PCa educational materials (average age = 55 years). Listening sessions of 1.5-hour duration were conducted to pretest materials; while presenting the materials, researchers probed beliefs

Screening for Prostate Cancer* Screening for Prostate Cancer | National Guideline Clearinghouse success fail JUL Aug 12 2018 2019 30 Sep 2016 - 13 Jul 2018 COLLECTED BY Organization: Formed in 2009, the Archive Team (not to be confused with the archive.org Archive-It Team) is a rogue archivist collective dedicated to saving copies of rapidly dying or deleted websites for the sake of history and digital heritage. The group is 100% composed of volunteers and interested parties, and has expanded (...) ? The AHRQ National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC, guideline.gov) Web site will not be available after July 16, 2018 because federal funding through AHRQ will no longer be available to support the NGC as of that date. For additional information, read our . Guideline Synthesis Screening for Prostate Cancer Guidelines Being Compared: American College of Physicians (ACP) Screening for prostate cancer: a guidance statement from the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians. 2013 Apr

Prostate-Specific Antigen?Based Population Screening for Prostate Cancer PSA-Based Population Screening for Prostate Cancer: OHTAC Recommendation. May 2015; pp. 1–5 Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)–Based Population Screening for Prostate Cancer: OHTAC Recommendation HEALTH QUALITY ONTARIO ONTARIO HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION OHTAC recommends against the introduction of a formal, population-based PSA screening program for prostate cancer in Ontario. BACKGROUND Prostate (...) Population Screening for Prostate Cancer: OHTAC Recommendation. May 2015; pp. 1–5 2 average-risk males reduces prostate cancer mortality or overall mortality, increases the detection of prostate cancer, or decreases the rate of aggressive or metastatic cancers? A systematic search of trials published between 2008 and 2013, specifically systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials (RCT) of PSA-based population screening programs, identified 11 reports, including 5 systematic reviews and 6 RCTs

Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)?based population screening for prostate cancer: an evidence-based analysis Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)–based population screening for prostate cancer: an evidence-based analysis Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)–based population screening for prostate cancer: an evidence-based analysis Pron G 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 Pron G. Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)–based population screening for prostate cancer: an evidence-based analysis. Toronto: Health Quality Ontario (HQO). Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series; 15(10). 2015 Authors' conclusions None of the systematic reviews of the randomized controlled screening trials for PC found a statistically significant reduction in relative risk of PC mortality or overall mortality with PSA-based population screening programs

Harms of Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) screening in prostate cancer: a rapid review Harms of Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) screening in prostate cancer: a rapid review Harms of Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) screening in prostate cancer: a rapid review Fergenbaum J 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 Fergenbaum J. Harms (...) of Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) screening in prostate cancer: a rapid review. Toronto: Health Quality Ontario (HQO). Rapid Review. 2015 Authors' conclusions Based on the evidence, the following conclusions can be made: There are major harms (unnecessary risks) associated with PSA screening, including: • harms associated with prostate biopsy • overdiagnosis There are minor harms associated with PSA screening including: • harms associated with PSA testing PSA-based screening for prostate cancer results

PSA screening, prostate biopsy, and treatment of prostate cancer in the years surrounding the USPSTF recommendation against prostate cancer screening. The 2012 United States Preventive Services Task Force recommendation against screening for prostate cancer has impacted rates of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and appears to be associated with declining prostate cancer incidence. Our objective was to characterize health care utilization that may explain these observed (...) trends.MarketScan claims, which capture >30 million privately insured patients in the United States, were queried for all men aged 40-64 years for the years 2008-2014. PSA testing, prostate biopsy, prostate cancer diagnosis, and definitive local treatment were determined using associated International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Current Procedural Terminology, Fourth Edition codes.There were approximately 6 million qualifying men with a full year of data. PSA testing, prostate biopsy

Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)?based population screening for prostate cancer: an economic analysis Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)–based population screening for prostate cancer: an economic analysis Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)–based population screening for prostate cancer: an economic analysis Tawfik A 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 Tawfik A. Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)–based population screening for prostate cancer: an economic analysis. Toronto: Health Quality Ontario (HQO). Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series; 15(11). 2015 Authors' conclusions PSA screening is associated with significant costs to the health care system when the cost of the PSA test itself is considered in addition to the costs of diagnosis, staging, and treatment of screen-detected PCs. Final publication URL Indexing Status

Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: a systematic review and meta-analysis. To investigate the efficacy and safety of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing to screen for prostate cancer.Systematic review and meta-analysis.Electronic search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, OpenGrey, LILACS, and Medline, and search of scientific meeting abstracts and trial registers to April 2018.Randomised controlled trials (...) mortality (IRR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.01; moderate certainty) and may have no effect on prostate-specific mortality (IRR 0.96, 0.85 to 1.08; low certainty). Sensitivity analysis of studies at lower risk of bias (n=1) also demonstrates that screening seems to have no effect on all-cause mortality (IRR 1.0, 0.98 to 1.02; moderate certainty) but may have a small effect on prostate-specific mortality (IRR 0.79, 0.69 to 0.91; moderate certainty). This corresponds to one less death from prostate cancer per

Prostate cancer screening Top results for prostate cancer screening - Trip Database or use your Google+ account Turning Research Into Practice ALL of these words: Title only Anywhere in the document ANY of these words: Title only Anywhere in the document This EXACT phrase: Title only Anywhere in the document EXCLUDING words: Title only Anywhere in the document Timeframe: to: Combine searches by placing the search numbers in the top search box and pressing the search button. An example search (...) might look like (#1 or #2) and (#3 or #4) Loading history... Population: Intervention: Comparison: Outcome: Population: Intervention: 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

Screening for prostate cancer in U.S. men: ACPM position statement on preventive practice. Guidelines and Measures | Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality HHS.gov Search ahrq.gov Search ahrq.gov Menu Topics A - Z Healthcare Delivery Latest available findings on quality of and access to health care Searchable database of AHRQ Grants, Working Papers & HHS Recovery Act Projects AHRQ Projects funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund You are here Guidelines and Measures Funding

Prostate Cancer: Screening Final Update Summary: Prostate Cancer: Screening - US Preventive Services Task Force Search USPSTF Website Text size: Assembly version: 1.0.0.308 Last Build: 11/16/2018 6:27:19 PM You are here: Final Summary Is Prostate Cancer Screening Right For You? (794 KB, ) Prostate Cancer: Screening Release Date: May 2018 Recommendation Summary Population Recommendation Grade Men aged 55 to 69 years For men aged 55 to 69 years, the decision to undergo periodic prostate-specific (...) antigen (PSA)–based screening for prostate cancer should be an individual one. Before deciding whether to be screened, men should have an opportunity to discuss the potential benefits and harms of screening with their clinician and to incorporate their values and preferences in the decision. Screening offers a small potential benefit of reducing the chance of death from prostate cancer in some men. However, many men will experience potential harms of screening, including false-positive results

Effect of a Low-Intensity PSA-Based Screening Intervention on Prostate Cancer Mortality: The CAP Randomized Clinical Trial. Prostate cancer screening remains controversial because potential mortality or quality-of-life benefits may be outweighed by harms from overdetection and overtreatment.To evaluate the effect of a single prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening intervention and standardized diagnostic pathway on prostate cancer-specific mortality.The Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing (...) stage and Gleason grade (range, 2-10; higher scores indicate a poorer prognosis) of prostate cancers identified, all-cause mortality, and an instrumental variable analysis estimating the causal effect of attending the PSA screening clinic.Among 415 357 randomized men (mean [SD] age, 59.0 [5.6] years), 189 386 in the intervention group and 219 439 in the control group were included in the analysis (n = 408 825; 98%). In the intervention group, 75 707 (40%) attended the PSA testing clinic and 67 313

Characteristics of Prostate Cancer Found at Fifth Screening in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Rotterdam: Can We Selectively Detect High-grade Prostate Cancer with Upfront Multivariable Risk Stratification and Magnetic Reson The harm of screening (unnecessary biopsies and overdiagnosis) generally outweighs the benefit of reducing prostate cancer (PCa) mortality in men aged ≥70 yr. Patient selection for biopsy using risk stratification and magnetic resonance (...) imaging (MRI) may improve this benefit-to-harm ratio.To assess the potential of a risk-based strategy including MRI to selectively identify men aged ≥70 yr with high-grade PCa.Three hundred and thirty-seven men with prostate-specific antigen ≥3.0 ng/ml at a fifth screening (71-75 yr) in the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Rotterdam were biopsied. One hundred and seventy-nine men received six-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy (TRUS-Bx), while 158 men received MRI, 12-core

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

Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled Trial. Screening for ovarian cancer with cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) and transvaginal ultrasound has an unknown effect on mortality.To evaluate the effect of screening for ovarian cancer on mortality in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial.Randomized controlled trial of 78,216 women aged 55 to 74 years assigned to undergo (...) ultrasound but received their usual medical care. Participants were followed up for a maximum of 13 years (median [range], 12.4 years [10.9-13.0 years]) for cancer diagnoses and death until February 28, 2010.Mortality from ovarian cancer, including primary peritoneal and fallopian tube cancers. Secondary outcomes included ovarian cancer incidence and complications associated with screening examinations and diagnostic procedures.Ovarian cancer was diagnosed in 212 women (5.7 per 10,000 person-years

PSA Test to Screen for Prostate Cancer PSA Test to Screen for Prostate Cancer – TheNNTTheNNT Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Test to Screen for Prostate Cancer 5 for unneeded biopsy In Summary, for those who got the PSA test: Benefits in NNT 100% saw no benefit 0% were helped by preventing death from any cause 0% were helped by preventing death from prostate cancer None were helped (preventing death from any cause, preventing death from prostate cancer) Harms in NNT 20% were harmed (...) with prostate CA in their lifetime and a 3% chance of dying from prostate cancer. Autopsy studies have shown that up to 2/3 of elderly men die with asymptomatic prostate cancer. It appears that if they live long enough most men will develop prostate cancer, though it will not affect their longevity. Given the high incidence of prostate cancer, there have been aggressive efforts to screen patients with the hopes of diagnosing local (non-metastatic) cancer that can be treated before it progresses. Elevated

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, Pennsylvania

Screening for prostate cancer Print | PDF PROSPERO This information has been provided by the named contact for this review. CRD has accepted this information in good faith and registered the review in PROSPERO. CRD bears no responsibility or liability for the content of this registration record, any associated files or external websites. Email salutation (e.g. "Dr Smith" or "Joanne") for correspondence: Organisation web address: Timing and effect measures Timing and effect measures Email (...) salutation (e.g. "Dr Smith" or "Joanne") for correspondence: Organisation web address: Context and rationale Inclusion criteria: Exclusion criteria: Inclusion criteria: Exclusion criteria: Inclusion criteria: Exclusion criteria: Inclusion criteria: Exclusion criteria: Inclusion criteria: Exclusion criteria: Example: Screening will be performed in two phases, namely initial screening based on title and abstract, followed by full-text screening of the eligible articles for final inclusion. In each phase, 2

A Community-Driven Intervention for Prostate Cancer Screening in African Americans. The purpose of the study was to assess the impact of an educational intervention on prostate cancer screening behavior and knowledge. Participants were 104 African American men, 45 years and older, who had not been screened for prostate cancer with a prostate-specific antigen and/or digital rectal exam within the past year. All participants received an intervention delivered by trained lay community educators (...) using a prostate cancer educational brochure developed in collaboration with the community, with structured interviews preintervention and 3 months postintervention. The main study outcomes included prostate-specific antigen screening rates during the 3-month interval and knowledge, barriers to screenings, and decisional conflict around screening. Compared with the 46 men who did not get screened, the 58 participants who got screened were more likely to have greater than a high school education