Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: AUA Guideline

By H. Carter, P. Albertsen, M. Barry, Ruth Etzioni, S. Freedland, Kirsten L. Greene, L. Holmberg, P. Kantoff, B. Konety, M. H. Murad and 2 more. Journal of Urology, 2013

1,178 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Purpose The guideline purpose is to provide the urologist with a framework for the early detection of prostate cancer in asymptomatic average risk men. Materials and Methods A systematic review was conducted and summarized evidence derived from over 300 studies that addressed the predefined outcomes of interest (prostate cancer incidence/mortality, quality of life, diagnostic accuracy and harms of testing). In addition to the quality of evidence, the panel considered values and preferences expressed in a clinical setting (patient-physician dyad) rather than having a public health perspective. Guideline statements were organized by age group in years (age <40; 40 to 54; 55 to 69; >70). Results With the exception of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based prostate cancer screening, there was minimal evidence to assess the outcomes of interest for other tests. The quality of evidence for the benefits of screening was moderate, and evidence for harm was high for men age 55 to 69 years. For men outside this age range, evidence was lacking for benefit, but the harms of screening, including over diagnosis and over treatment, remained. Modeled data suggested that a screening interval of two years or more may be preferred to reduce the harms of screening. Conclusions The Panel recommended shared decision-making for men age 55 to 69 years considering PSA-based screening, a target age group for whom benefits may outweigh harms. Outside this age range, PSA-based screening as a routine could not be recommended based on the available evidence. The entire guideline is available at www.AUAnet.org/education/guidelines/prostate-cancer-detection.cfm

Subfields: Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8f5679d76a0816245e9b5082e86c6c0100fbe140

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

  1. A. Burnett
  2. A. Nehra
  3. H. Sadeghi-Nejad
  4. M. Khera
  5. M. Miner
  6. C. Nelson
  7. L. Hakim
  8. M. Faraday

Citations in the corpus