Dataset Information

Low-risk prostate lesions: An evidence review to inform discussion on losing the "cancer" label.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Active surveillance (AS) mitigates harms from overtreatment of low-risk prostate lesions. Recalibration of diagnostic thresholds to redefine which prostate lesions are considered "cancer" and/or adopting alternative diagnostic labels could increase AS uptake and continuation.

Methods

We searched PubMed and EMBASE to October 2021 for evidence on: (1) clinical outcomes of AS, (2) subclinical prostate cancer at autopsy, (3) reproducibility of histopathological diagnosis, and (4) diagnostic drift. Evidence is presented via narrative synthesis.

Results

AS: one systematic review (13 studies) of men undergoing AS found that prostate cancer-specific mortality was 0%-6% at 15 years. There was eventual termination of AS and conversion to treatment in 45%-66% of men. Four additional cohort studies reported very low rates of metastasis (0%-2.1%) and prostate cancer-specific mortality (0%-0.1%) over follow-up to 15 years. Overall, AS was terminated without medical indication in 1%-9% of men. Subclinical reservoir: 1 systematic review (29 studies) estimated that the subclinical cancer prevalence was 5% at <30 years, and increased nonlinearly to 59% by >79 years. Four additional autopsy studies (mean age: 54-72 years) reported prevalences of 12%-43%. Reproducibility: 1 recent well-conducted study found high reproducibility for low-risk prostate cancer diagnosis, but this was more variable in 7 other studies. Diagnostic drift: 4 studies provided consistent evidence of diagnostic drift, with the most recent (published 2020) reporting that 66% of cases were upgraded and 3% were downgraded when using contemporary diagnostic criteria compared to original diagnoses (1985-1995).

Conclusions

Evidence collated may inform discussion of diagnostic changes for low-risk prostate lesions.

SUBMITTER: Semsarian CR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10952636 | biostudies-literature | 2023 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Low-risk prostate lesions: An evidence review to inform discussion on losing the "cancer" label.

Semsarian Caitlin R CR Ma Tara T Nickel Brooke B Barratt Alexandra A Varma Murali M Delahunt Brett B Millar Jeremy J Parker Lisa L Glasziou Paul P Bell Katy J L KJL

The Prostate 20230222 6

<h4>Background</h4>Active surveillance (AS) mitigates harms from overtreatment of low-risk prostate lesions. Recalibration of diagnostic thresholds to redefine which prostate lesions are considered "cancer" and/or adopting alternative diagnostic labels could increase AS uptake and continuation.<h4>Methods</h4>We searched PubMed and EMBASE to October 2021 for evidence on: (1) clinical outcomes of AS, (2) subclinical prostate cancer at autopsy, (3) reproducibility of histopathological diagnosis, a ...[more]

PMID: 36811453

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPopulation mammographic screening for breast cancer has led to large increases in the diagnosis and treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Active surveillance has been proposed as a management strategy for low-risk DCIS to mitigate against potential overdiagnosis and overtreatment. However, clinicians and patients remain reluctant to choose active surveillance, even within a trial setting. Re-calibration of the diagnostic threshold for low-risk DCIS and/or use of a label that does not include the word 'cancer' might encourage the uptake of active surveillance and other conservative treatment options. We aimed to identify and collate relevant epidemiological evidence to inform further discussion on these ideas.MethodsWe searched PubMed and EMBASE databases for low-risk DCIS studies in four categories: (1) natural history; (2) subclinical cancer found at autopsy; (3) diagnostic reproducibility (two or more pathologist interpretations at a single time point); and (4) diagnostic drift (two or more pathologist interpretations at different time points). Where we identified a pre-existing systematic review, the search was restricted to studies published after the inclusion period of the review. Two authors screened records, extracted data, and performed risk of bias assessment. We undertook a narrative synthesis of the included evidence within each category.ResultsNatural History (n = 11): one systematic review and nine primary studies were included, but only five provided evidence on the prognosis of women with low-risk DCIS. These studies reported that women with low-risk DCIS had comparable outcomes whether or not they had surgery. The risk of invasive breast cancer in patients with low-risk DCIS ranged from 6.5% (7.5 years) to 10.8% (10 years). The risk of dying from breast cancer in patients with low-risk DCIS ranged from 1.2 to 2.2% (10 years). Subclinical cancer at autopsy (n = 1): one systematic review of 13 studies estimated the mean prevalence of subclinical in situ breast cancer to be 8.9%. Diagnostic reproducibility (n = 13): two systematic reviews and 11 primary studies found at most moderate agreement in differentiating low-grade DCIS from other diagnoses. Diagnostic drift: no studies found.ConclusionEpidemiological evidence supports consideration of relabelling and/or recalibrating diagnostic thresholds for low-risk DCIS. Such diagnostic changes would need agreement on the definition of low-risk DCIS and improved diagnostic reproducibility.

Project description:BackgroundProfessional organizations recommend that physicians discuss prostate cancer with patients to make individual screening decisions. However, few studies have tested strategies to encourage such discussions, particularly among high-risk populations. We examined the effects of two low-literacy interventions on the frequency of prostate cancer discussion and screening.DesignRandomized, blinded, controlled trial with concealed allocation.Setting/participantsInner-city primary care clinic, serving a predominately African-American population. Participants were men aged 45-70 with no history of prostate cancer, presenting for a regular appointment.InterventionsWhile waiting to see their physician, patients received a patient education handout on prostate cancer screening (PtEd), a handout simply encouraging patients to talk to their doctor about prostate cancer (Cue), or a control handout. The interventions did not advocate for or against screening.MeasuresPatient-reported discussion of prostate cancer with the physician and chart reviews determine prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test orders and performance of digital rectal examination (DRE). Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed. Data were collected in 2003, and analyses were completed in 2006.ResultsMost of the 250 subjects (90.4%) were African American and 78.8% read below the ninth grade level. Overall, 48.4% reported discussing prostate cancer during the appointment. Compared to the control group (37.3%), discussions were significantly more common in the Cue group (58.0%, aOR=2.39 [1.26-4.52]), as well as in the PtEd group (50.0%, aOR=1.92 [1.01-3.65]). When prostate cancer was discussed, patients in the intervention groups more commonly initiated the conversation (47.6% PtEd and 40.0% Cue, vs 9.7% control, p<0.01 for each comparison to control). Compared to the control group (2.4%), PSA test orders increased in the PtEd group (14.1%, aOR=7.62 [1.62-35.83]) and in the Cue group (12.3%, aOR=5.86 [1.24-27.81]). Documentation of DRE did not change significantly (4.7% PtEd, 6.2% Cue, and 6.0% control).ConclusionsTwo simple low-literacy interventions significantly increased discussion of prostate cancer and PSA test orders but not performance of DRE. Both interventions were effective in empowering low-literacy patients to initiate conversations about prostate cancer with their physician.

Project description:ContextSeveral liquid- and tissue-based biomarker tests (LTBTs) are available to inform the need for prostate biopsies and treatment of localised prostate cancer (PCa) through risk stratification, but translation into routine practice requires evidence of their clinical utility and economic impact.ObjectiveTo review and summarise the health economic evidence on the ability of LTBTs to inform decisions on prostate biopsies and treatment of localised PCa through risk stratification.Evidence acquisitionA systematic search was performed in the EMBASE, MEDLINE, Health Technology Assessment, and National Health Service Health Economic Evaluation databases. Eligible publications were those presenting health economic evaluations of an LTBT to select individuals for biopsy or risk-stratify PCa patients for treatment. Data on the study objectives, context, methodology, clinical utility, and outcomes were extracted and summarised.Evidence synthesisOf the 22 studies included, 14 were focused on test-informed biopsies and eight on treatment selection. Most studies performed cost-effectiveness analyses (n = 7), followed by costing (n = 4) or budget impact analyses (n = 3). Most (18 of 22) studies concluded that biomarker tests could decrease health care costs or would be cost-effective. However, downstream consequences and long-term outcomes were typically not included in studies that evaluated LTBT to inform biopsies. Long-term effectiveness was modelled by linking evidence from different sources instead of using data from prospective studies.ConclusionsAlthough studies concluded that LTBTs would probably be cost-saving or -effective, the strength of this evidence is disputable because of concerns around the validity and transparency of the assumptions made. This warrants prospective interventional trials to inform health economic analyses to ensure collection of direct evidence of clinical outcomes based on LTBT use.Patient summaryWe reviewed studies that evaluated whether blood, urine, and tissue tests can reduce the health and economic burden of prostate cancer. Results indicate that these tests could be cost-effective, but clinical studies of long-term outcomes are needed to confirm the findings.

Project description:Aims/hypothesisIdentifying risk factors for tinnitus could facilitate not only the recommendations for prevention measures, but also identifying potential pathways for new interventions. This study reports the first comprehensive systematic review of analytical observational studies able to provide information about causality (i.e., case-control and cohort designs).MethodsA literature search of four electronic databases identified epidemiological studies published on tinnitus and different exposures. Independent raters screened all studies, extracted data, and evaluated study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Reported relative risks (RR), hazard ratios (HR), odds ratios (OR), and prevalence ratios (PR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to compute crude estimates of RR for tinnitus risk factors.ResultsFrom 2389 records identified, a total of 374 articles were read as full text (24 reviews, 301 cross-sectional studies, 42 cohort studies, and 7 case-control studies). However, from 49 case-control and cohort studies, only 25 adequately reported risk ratios. Using the findings from these studies, positive causal associations were found for various hearing-related factors (i.e., unspecified hearing loss, sensorineural hearing loss, occupational noise exposure, ototoxic platinum therapy, and otitis media). Evidence was also found for a number of non-otological risk factors including temporo-mandibular joint disorder, depression, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and hyperlipidemia. Negative associations indicating preventative effects were found for diabetes and high alcohol consumption. No associations were found for low alcohol consumption, body mass index, head injury, heart failure, hypertension, leisure noise exposure, migraine, rheumatoid arthritis, sex, smoking, stroke, and whiplash. However, with the exception of unspecified hearing loss, these findings resulted from pooling no more than 4 studies, illustrating that the vast majority of the associations still remain inconclusive.ConclusionsThese systematic review and meta-analysis confirm a number of otological and non-otological risk factors for tinnitus. By highlighting major gaps in knowledge, our synthesis can help provide direction for future research that will shed light on the pathophysiology, improve management strategies, and inform more effective preventions.

Dataset Information

Low-risk prostate lesions: An evidence review to inform discussion on losing the "cancer" label.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Low-risk prostate lesions: An evidence review to inform discussion on losing the "cancer" label.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets