𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

The effect of study arm on prostate cancer treatment in the large screening trial ERSPC

✍ Scribed by Tineke Wolters; Monique J. Roobol; Ewout W. Steyerberg; Roderick C.N. van den Bergh; Chris H. Bangma; Jonas Hugosson; Stefano Ciatto; Maciej Kwiatkowski; Arnauld Villers; Marcos Luján; Vera Nelen; Teuvo L.J. Tammela; Fritz H. Schröder


Book ID
102271862
Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
2010
Tongue
French
Weight
138 KB
Volume
126
Category
Article
ISSN
0020-7136

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

✦ Synopsis


Abstract

Prostate cancer (PC) mortality is the most valid end‐point in screening trials, but could be influenced by the choice of initial treatment if treatment has an effect on mortality. In this study, PC treatment was compared between the screening and control arms in a screening trial. Data were collected from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). The characteristics and initial treatment of PC cases detected in the screening and the control arm were compared. Polytomous logistic regression analysis was used to assess the influence of study arm on treatment, adjusting for potential confounders and with statistical imputation of missing values. A total of 8,389 PC cases were detected, 5,422 in the screening arm and 3,145 in the control arm. Polytomous regression showed that trial arm was associated with treatment choice after correction for missing values, especially in men with high‐risk PC. A control subject with high‐risk PC was more likely than a screen subject to receive radiotherapy (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.01–2.05, p = 0.047), expectant management (OR: 2.92, 95% CI: 1.33–6.42, p = 0.007) or hormonal treatment (OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.07–2.94, p = 0.026) instead of radical prostatectomy. However, trial arm had only a minor role in treatment choice compared to other variables. In conclusion, a small effect of trial arm on treatment choice was seen, particularly in men with high‐risk PC. Therefore, differences in treatment between arms are unlikely to play a major role in the interpretation of the results of the ERSPC.


📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES


Prostate cancer mortality reduction by s
✍ Harry J. de Koning; Michael K. Liem; Caroline A. Baan; Rob Boer; Fritz H. Schröd 📂 Article 📅 2001 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 French ⚖ 97 KB 👁 2 views

## Abstract From 1992–2001, 7 countries in Europe gradually recruited men for the European Randomised Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial. Centres recruit different age groups and have different designs for recruiting and countries have different underlying risks for prostate cancer. Recrui

Large-scale randomized prostate cancer s
✍ Harry J. de Koning; Anssi Auvinen; Antonio Berenguer Sanchez; Fernando Calais da 📂 Article 📅 2001 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 French ⚖ 79 KB 👁 2 views

## Abstract Two large‐scale randomized screening trials, the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovary (PLCO) cancer trial in the USA and the European Randomized Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial in Europe are currently under way, aimed at assessing whether screening reduces prostate cancer mo

Effect of the correction for noncomplian
✍ Melissa Kerkhof; Monique J. Roobol; Jack Cuzick; Peter Sasieni; Stijn Roemeling; 📂 Article 📅 2010 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 French ⚖ 252 KB 👁 2 views

## Abstract The European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) has recently reported a 20% reduction in death from prostate cancer in a population‐based prostate cancer screening (core age group: 55–69 years of age). The effect of screening may be diluted by noncompliance in the