Scottish medical journal · 2013
There are calls for a national screening programme for prostate cancer: what is the evidence to justify such a national screening programme?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Green A, Tait C, Aboumarzouk O, Somani B K, Cohen N P
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer is the commonest cancer in men and a major health issue worldwide. Screening for early disease has been available for many years, but there is still no national screening programme established in the United Kingdom.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the latest evidence regarding prostate cancer screening and whether it meets the necessary requirements to be established as a national programme for all men.
METHODS: Electronic databases and library catalogues were searched electronically and manual retrieval was performed. Only primary research results were used for the analysis.
RESULTS: In recent years, several important randomised controlled trials have produced varied outcomes. In Europe the largest study thus far concluded that screening reduced prostate cancer mortality by 20%. On the contrary, a large American trial found no reduction in mortality after 7-10 years follow-up. Most studies comment on the adverse effects of screening - principally those of overdiagnosis and subsequent overtreatment.
DISCUSSION: Further information about the natural history of prostate cancer and accuracy of screening is needed before a screening programme can be truly justified. In the interim, doctors and patients should discuss the risks, benefits and sequelae of taking part in voluntary screening for prostate cancer.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the latest evidence regarding prostate cancer screening and whether it meets the necessary requirements to be established as a national programme for all men.
METHODS: Electronic databases and library catalogues were searched electronically and manual retrieval was performed. Only primary research results were used for the analysis.
RESULTS: In recent years, several important randomised controlled trials have produced varied outcomes. In Europe the largest study thus far concluded that screening reduced prostate cancer mortality by 20%. On the contrary, a large American trial found no reduction in mortality after 7-10 years follow-up. Most studies comment on the adverse effects of screening - principally those of overdiagnosis and subsequent overtreatment.
DISCUSSION: Further information about the natural history of prostate cancer and accuracy of screening is needed before a screening programme can be truly justified. In the interim, doctors and patients should discuss the risks, benefits and sequelae of taking part in voluntary screening for prostate cancer.