Screening history and risk of death from prostate cancer: a nested case-control study within the screening arm of the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (FinRSPC).

PURPOSE: We assessed the risk of death from prostate cancer (PCa) in relation to men's screening histories, i.e., screening attendance among men who were offered screening. METHODS: Men in the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (FinRSPC) screening arm were invited to up to three screening rounds with the serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test at 4-year intervals during 1996-2007. Case subjects (n = 330) were men who died from PCa. Each case was matched to five controls (n = 1544) among the men who were free of PCa. Screening history was defined as (1) never/ever attended screening prior to the case diagnosis; (2) attended at the first screening round; and (3) recency of screening, calculated as the time from last screening attendance to the date of case diagnosis. The association between screening history and the risk of death from PCa was estimated by odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: Having ever attended screening versus never attended was associated with a reduced risk of PCa death (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.45-0.81) and a similar association was found for those attended (versus not attended) the first screening round (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51-0.87). The effect by time since last screen for the risk of PCa death was significantly lower 2-7 years since last screen. CONCLUSION: Among men invited to screening, subjects who attended any PSA screening during the previous 19 years had a 40% reduction in PCa mortality compared to non-screened men.

Which men benefit from prostate cancer screening? Prostate cancer mortality by subgroup in the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether a subgroup of men can be identified that would benefit more from screening than others. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was based on three European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) centres, Finland, the Netherlands and Sweden. We identified 126 827 men aged 55-69 years in the study who were followed for maximum of 16 years after randomisation. The primary outcome was prostate cancer (PCa) mortality. We analysed three age groups 55-59, 60-64 and 65-69 years and PCa cases within four European Association of Urology (EAU) risk groups: low, intermediate, high risk, and advanced disease. RESULTS: The hazard ratio (HR) for PCa mortality in the screening arm relative to the control arm for men aged 55-59 years was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75-1.24) in Finland, 0.70 (95% CI 0.44-1.12) in the Netherlands and 0.42 (95% CI 0.24-0.73) in Sweden. The HR for men aged 60-64 years was 1.03 (95% CI 0.77-1.37) in Finland, 0.76 (95% CI 0.50-1.16) in the Netherlands and 0.97 (95% CI 0.64-1.48) in Sweden. The HR for men aged 65-69 years was 0.80 (95% CI 0.62-1.03) in Finland and 0.57 (95% CI 0.38-0.83) in the Netherlands, and this age group was absent in Sweden. In the EAU risk group analysis, PCa mortality rates were materially lower for men with advanced disease at diagnosis in all three countries: 0.67 (95% CI 0.56-0.82) in Finland, 0.28 (95% CI 0.18-0.44) in the Netherlands, and 0.48 (95% CI 0.30-0.78) in Sweden. CONCLUSION: We were unable to unequivocally identify the optimal age group for screening, as mortality reduction differed among centres and age groups. Instead, the screening effect appears to depend on screening duration, and the number and frequency of screening rounds. PCa mortality reduction by screening is largely attributable to stage shift.

Prostate cancer incidence in men with prostate-specific antigen below 3 ng/mL: The Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer (PCa) can reduce PCa mortality, but also involves overdetection of low-risk disease with potential adverse effects. We evaluated PCa incidence among men with PSA below 3 ng/mL and no PCa diagnosis at the first screening round of the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for PCa. Follow-up started at the first screening attendance and ended at PCa diagnosis, emigration, death or the common closing date (December 2016), whichever came first. Cox regression analysis was used to estimate hazard ratios and their confidence intervals (CI). Among men with PSA <3 ng/mL, cumulative PCa incidence was 9.1% after 17.6 years median follow-up. Cumulative incidence was 3.6% among men with baseline PSA 0 to 0.99 ng/mL, 11.5% in those with PSA 1.0 to 1.99 ng/mL and 25.7% among men with PSA 2 to 2.99 ng/mL (hazard ratio 9.0, 95% CI: 7.9-10.2 for the latter). The differences by PSA level were most striking for low-risk disease based on Gleason score and EAU risk group. PSA values <1 ng/mL indicate a very low 20-year risk, while at PSA 2 to 2.99 ng/mL risks are materially higher, with 4- to 5-fold risk for aggressive disease. Using risk-stratification and appropriate rescreening intervals will reduce screening intensity and overdetection. Using cumulative incidence of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) as the criterion, rescreening intervals could range from approximately 3 years for men with initial PSA 2 to 2.99 ng/mL, 6 years for men with PSA 1 to 1.99 ng/mL to 10 years for men with PSA <1 ng/mL.

Antidiabetic drugs, glycemic control and risk of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes has been associated with an increased risk of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). However, the role of antidiabetic drugs as a BPH risk factor is unclear. The objective of our study was to examine the risk of BPH by antidiabetic drug use and glycemic control in a large population-based cohort of Finnish men. METHODS: A total of 74,754 men in the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (FinRSPC) free of BPH at baseline in 1996-1999 were linked to the national medication reimbursement database for information on physician-prescribed antidiabetic drug purchases. Information on recorded BPH procedures and diagnoses was obtained from the National Care Register for Health Care, and for a subgroup of 17,739 men, information on blood glucose levels (BGLs) from the Fimlab Laboratories database. Cox regression with antidiabetic drug use and BGL as time-dependent variables was used to analyze the risks for starting BPH medication, recorded BPH diagnosis, and undergoing BPH surgery. The analysis was adjusted for age, use of statins, antihypertensive medication, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. RESULTS: Of the subjects, 14,012 men (18.7%) used antidiabetic medication. Of the subgroup with fasting blood glucose data available, 7487 (42.2%) had diabetic level. The risks for BPH diagnosis (HR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.03-1.13) and surgery (HR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.09-1.24) were slightly elevated among antidiabetic drug users compared to nonusers. The association was strongest for insulin use. Similarly, risk of BPH surgery was increased in men with diabetic blood glucose compared to normoglycemic men. The risk association was attenuated by use of antidiabetic drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic BGL and antidiabetic medication use, especially insulin, are associated with an elevated risk of BPH surgery compared to nondiabetic men. These findings support the roles of insulin use and untreated hyperglycemia as possible BPH risk factors.

Testosterone replacement therapy is not associated with increased prostate cancer incidence, prostate cancer-specific, or cardiovascular disease-specific mortality in Finnish men.

BACKGROUND: Concerns have been expressed over the safety of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) in men with late-onset hypogonadism (LOH). Previous studies have shown controversial results regarding the association of TRT with the risk of cardiovascular events or prostate cancer (PCa) incidence, aggressiveness, and mortality. This study explores the overall risk of PCa and risk by tumor grade and stage, as well as mortality from PCa and cardiovascular disease (CVD), among men treated with TRT compared to men without LOH and TRT use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 78,615 men of age 55-67 years at baseline from the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (FinRSPC). Follow-up started at randomization and ended at death, emigration, or a common closing date January 1st, 2017. Cox proportional hazards regression model with time-dependent variables and adjustment for age, trial arm, use of other medications, and Charlson comorbidity index was used. Comprehensive information on TRT purchases during 1995-2015 was obtained from the Finnish National Prescription Database. PCa cases were identified from the Finnish Cancer Registry and causes of death obtained from Statistics Finland. RESULTS: Over the course of 18 years of follow-up, 2919 men were on TRT, and 285 PCa cases were diagnosed among them. TRT users did not exhibit a higher incidence or mortality rate of PCa compared to non-users. On the contrary, men using TRT had lower PCa mortality than non-users (HR = 0.52; 95% CI 0.3-0.91). Additionally, TRT users had slightly lower CVD and all-cause mortality compared to non-users (HR = 0.87; 95% CI 0.75-1.01 and HR = 0.93; 95% CI 0.87-1.0, respectively). No time- or dose-dependency of TRT use was evident in any of the analyses. CONCLUSION: Men using TRT were not associated to increased risk for PCa and did not experience increased PCa- or CVD-specific mortality compared to non-users. Further studies considering blood testosterone levels are warranted.

Anti-epileptic drugs and prostate cancer-specific mortality compared to non-users of anti-epileptic drugs in the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Drugs with histone deacetylase inhibitory (HDACi) properties have shown to decrease prostate cancer (PCa) cell growth in vitro. METHODS: A cohort of 9261 PCa cases from the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (FinRSPC) was used to evaluate prostate cancer-specific mortality in men using anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs). A national subscription database was used to obtain information on medication use. Cox regression with AED use as a time-dependent variable was used to analyse prostate cancer mortality in men using AEDs compared to non-users, and in men using HDACi AEDs compared to users of other AEDs. The analysis was adjusted for age, screening trial arm, PCa risk group, primary treatment of PCa, Charlson co-morbidity score and concomitant use of other drugs. RESULTS: The use of AEDs, in general, was associated with an increased risk of PCa death. The use of HDACi AEDs was not significantly associated with decreased PCa mortality compared to use of other AEDs (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.31-1.23). CONCLUSIONS: AED usage is associated with elevated PCa mortality compared to non-users, likely reflecting the differences between men with epilepsy and those without. No benefit was observed from HDACi drugs compared to other AEDs.

Antiepileptic drugs and prostate cancer risk in the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) with histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor properties decrease prostate cancer (PCa) cell proliferation in vitro. A population-based cohort of 78 615 men was used to evaluate the risk of PCa among users of AEDs. Study population was linked to the Finnish national prescription database to obtain information on individual medication reimbursements in 1996 to 2015. Cox regression with antiepileptic medication use as a time-dependent variable was used to analyze PCa risk overall, and low, medium and high-risk PCa separately. The analysis was adjusted for age, screening trial arm, and other drugs in use, including statins, antidiabetic drugs, antihypertensive drugs, aspirin, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Compared to the nonusers of AEDs, overall PCa risk was decreased among AED users (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.76-0.96). A similar PCa risk decrease was observed among users of HDACi AEDs (HR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.76-1.01), but no risk difference was found when comparing HDACi AED users to users of other AEDs (HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.76-1.27). Our study showed a decrease in overall PCa risk among men using AEDs compared to nonusers. The risk associations were similar for HDAC inhibitors as for AEDs in general.

Number of screening rounds attended and incidence of high-risk prostate cancer in the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (FinRSPC).

BACKGROUND: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer has shown a 20% reduction in prostate cancer (PC) mortality by prostate-specific antigen-based screening. In addition, screening has been shown to reduce the risk of advanced PC. The objective of the current study was to analyze the impact of screening participation on the incidence of PC by risk group. METHODS: The participants in the screening arm of the Finnish trial (31,867 men) were classified according to screening attendance in a time-dependent fashion. Initially, all men in the screening arm were regarded as nonattenders until the first screening attendance; they then remained in the once-screened group until the second screen and similarly for the possible third round. The control arm formed the reference group. Follow-up started at randomization and ended at the time of diagnosis of PC, emigration, or the end of 2015. PC cases were divided into risk groups according to European Association of Urology definitions. RESULTS: The incidence of low-risk PC increased with the number of screens, whereas no clear relation with participation was noted in the intermediate-risk and high-risk cases. For patients with advanced PC, attending screening at least twice was associated with a lower risk. CONCLUSIONS: Screening reduces the risk of advanced PC after only 2 screening cycles. A single screen demonstrated no benefit in terms of PC incidence. Repeated screening is necessary to achieve screening advantages.

Estimating the rate of overdiagnosis with prostate cancer screening: evidence from the Finnish component of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Screening for prostate cancer may have limited impact on decreasing prostate cancer-related mortality. A major disadvantage is overdiagnosis, whereby lesions are identified that would not have become evident during the man's lifetime if screening had not taken place. The present study aims to estimate the rate of overdiagnosis using Finnish data from the European randomized trial of prostate cancer screening. METHODS: We used data from 80,149 men randomized to a screening or a control group, distinguishing four birth cohorts. We used the "catch-up method" to identify when the difference in the cumulative incidence of prostate cancer between the screening and control groups had stabilized, implying that the screening has no further effect. We define the overdiagnosis rate to be the relative excess cumulative incidence in the screened group at that point. As an independent method, we also examined the diagnosis rates of T1c tumors as an indicator of early tumors detected by PSA. RESULTS: The estimates of overdiagnosis rates from the catch-up method using the full period of available follow-up ranged between cohorts from 2.3% to 15.4%, and the T1c analysis gave very similar results. CONCLUSION: Some overdiagnosis has occurred, but there is uncertainty about its extent. A long follow-up is required to demonstrate the full impact of screening. We evaluated the overdiagnosis rates at a population level, associated with being offered screening, taking account of contamination (screening among the controls). The overall evaluation of screening should incorporate mortality benefit, cost-effectiveness, and quality of life.

Bias-corrected estimates of effects of PSA screening decisions on the risk of prostate cancer diagnosis and death: Analysis of the Finnish randomized study of screening for prostate cancer.

More information is needed about effects of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for informed decision making. The objective of our study is to evaluate the effects of an implemented screening decision on the risk of prostate cancer (PC) diagnosis and PC death. In a randomized trial, 31,867 Finnish men aged 55-67 years were allocated to the screening arm and 48,282 to the control arm during 1996-1999. Two to three screening rounds were offered to the screening arm with a PSA cut-off of 4.0 ng/ml. A counterfactual exclusion method was used to adjust for the effects of screening noncompliance and PSA contamination on risk of PC death and PC incidence by prognostic group at 15 years of follow up. After correcting for noncompliance and contamination, PSA screening led to 32.4 (95% CI 26.4, 38.6) more PC diagnoses per 1,000 men after 15 years and 1.4 (95% CI 0.0, 2.8) fewer PC deaths compared to the control arm. The corresponding results of an intention-to-screen analysis were 16.5 (95% CI 12.3, 20.7) and 0.8 (95% CI 0.5, 2.0), respectively. These results can be used for patient counseling in informed decision making about PC screening. A limitation of the study was the lack of comprehensive data on contamination.

Fasting blood glucose, glycaemic control and prostate cancer risk in the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic men have lowered overall risk of prostate cancer (PCa), but the role of hyperglycaemia is unclear. In this cohort study, we estimated PCa risk among men with diabetic fasting blood glucose level. METHODS: Participants of the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (FinRSPC) were linked to laboratory database for information on glucose measurements since 1978. The data were available for 17,860 men. Based on the average yearly level, the men were categorised as normoglycaemic, prediabetic, or diabetic. Median follow-up was 14.7 years. Multivariable-adjusted Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for prostate cancer overall and separately by Gleason grade and metastatic stage. RESULTS: In total 1,663 PCa cases were diagnosed. Compared to normoglycaemic men, those men with diabetic blood glucose level had increased risk of PCa (HR 1.52; 95% CI 1.31-1.75). The risk increase was observed for all tumour grades, and persisted for a decade afterwards. Antidiabetic drug use removed the risk association. Limitations include absence of information on lifestyle factors and limited information on BMI. CONCLUSIONS: Untreated diabetic fasting blood glucose level may be a prostate cancer risk factor.

Prognostic factors of prostate cancer mortality in a Finnish randomized screening trial.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the prognostic factors of prostate cancer death among patients enrolled in a Finnish prostate cancer screening trial. METHODS: Data on TNM stage, Gleason score, serum prostate-specific antigen at diagnosis, comorbidity and primary treatment were collected from medical records, as well as date and cause of death from Statistics Finland. Four prognostic risk groups were defined based on TNM stage, Gleason score and prostate-specific antigen at diagnosis. Hazard ratios and their 95% confidence intervals for prostate cancer death were calculated using Cox regression and competing-risk analysis with follow up from randomization. The differences in the effects of prognostic factors were assessed using interaction terms. RESULTS: The 15-year survival was significantly lower among cases in the control arm compared with the screening arm (0.90 vs 0.92). However, the survival advantage was limited to screen-detected cases (0.94 vs 0.91 in cases detected outside screening). The prognostic risk group was the strongest factor predicting survival in the control arm, but weaker in screen-detected cases. Advanced disease was associated with substantially poorer outcome in cases detected outside screening than in screen-detected disease. Primary treatment had a similar effect in all groups. Comorbidity had a small prognostic effect in the control arm only. CONCLUSIONS: Prognostic factors had a different effect on the outcome of cases detected through screening as those diagnosed otherwise. A high diagnostic prostate-specific antigen and advanced disease carried a poor prognosis, especially among the cases detected outside screening, even when lead-time was eliminated. This shows that the screening resulted in earlier treatment among the cases in the screening arm.

The effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on risk of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

BACKGROUND: Inflammation may play a role in pathogenesis of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). However, the role of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as BPH risk factor is unclear. The objective of this study was to examine risk of BPH by NSAID use in a population-based cohort. METHODS: A total of 74 754 Finnish men without previous BPH at baseline in 1996-1999 were linked to national medication reimbursement database for information on physician-prescribed NSAID purchases during 1995-2009. Information on BPH procedures and diagnoses was obtained from national Care Register for Health Care. Cox regression with adjustment for age and use of cholesterol-lowering, antidiabetic and antihypertensive medication, with NSAID use as time-dependent variable was used to analyse the risk of BPH surgery, medication use, and recorded diagnosis. RESULTS: Of the subjects 57 707 men (77.2%) used prescription NSAIDs. The risk of BPH was elevated among NSAID users compared to non-users: HR 2.04, 95% CI 1.97-2.10 for BPH medication use, HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.47-1.71 for recorded diagnosis and HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.49-1.74 for surgery. The risk increase correlated with duration of NSAID usage, less with annual dosage. Nevertheless, the risk increase was observed already at short-term and low-dosage use. CONCLUSIONS: NSAID use is associated with an increased risk of BPH. The association is affected by systematic differences by NSAID use as the risk increase was observed already at short-term use. Nevertheless, the association correlated with duration of use, suggesting that NSAID usage or the conditions indicating it may increase BPH risk.

Impact of cause of death adjudication on the results of the European prostate cancer screening trial.

BACKGROUND: The European Randomised Study of Prostate Cancer Screening has shown a 21% relative reduction in prostate cancer mortality at 13 years. The causes of death can be misattributed, particularly in elderly men with multiple comorbidities, and therefore accurate assessment of the underlying cause of death is crucial for valid results. To address potential unreliability of end-point assessment, and its possible impact on mortality results, we analysed the study outcome adjudication data in six countries. METHODS: Latent class statistical models were formulated to compare the accuracy of individual adjudicators, and to assess whether accuracy differed between the trial arms. We used the model to assess whether correcting for adjudication inaccuracies might modify the study results. RESULTS: There was some heterogeneity in adjudication accuracy of causes of death, but no consistent differential accuracy by trial arm. Correcting the estimated screening effect for misclassification did not alter the estimated mortality effect of screening. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings were consistent with earlier reports on the European screening trial. Observer variation, while demonstrably present, is unlikely to have materially biased the main study results. A bias in assigning causes of death that might have explained the mortality reduction by screening can be effectively ruled out.

Outcomes of Prostate Cancer Screening by 5α-Reductase Inhibitor Use.

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer screening with prostate specific antigen reduces prostate cancer mortality but leads to over diagnosis of indolent prostate cancer. The use of 5α-reductase inhibitors lowers prostate specific antigen and in theory could affect the performance of prostate specific antigen based screening. We evaluated the outcomes of prostate cancer screening in 5α-reductase inhibitors users. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was performed in FinRSPC (Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer). Of 80,454 men 31,866 were randomized to be screened at 4-year intervals during 1996 to 2004. Information on 5α-reductase inhibitors reimbursements before prostate cancer during 1995 to 2009 was collected from the national prescription database for 78,615 men. We evaluated the effect of screening on prostate cancer risk and mortality by 5α-reductase inhibitors using Cox regression. RESULTS: Men receiving 5α-reductase inhibitors had higher median prostate specific antigen and were more often screen positive than nonusers. Despite this, screening did not significantly affect prostate cancer detection (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79-1.01) or mortality (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.51-1.32) compared to findings in the control arm among men on 5α-reductase inhibitors. On ROC analysis prostate specific antigen and age did not predict Gleason 7-10 prostate cancer as accurately in 5α-reductase inhibitors users as it did among nonusers (first screening round AUC 0.79 vs 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: Prostate specific antigen based screening among men receiving 5α-reductase inhibitors did not improve the detection of high grade or metastatic prostate cancer, or prevent prostate cancer death.

Estimate of Opportunistic Prostate Specific Antigen Testing in the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Screening for prostate cancer remains controversial, although ERSPC (European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer) showed a 21% relative reduction in prostate cancer mortality. The Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer, which is the largest component of ERSPC, demonstrated a statistically nonsignificant 16% mortality benefit in a separate analysis. The purpose of this study was to estimate the degree of contamination in the control arm of the Finnish trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Altogether 48,295 and 31,872 men were randomized to the control and screening arms, respectively. The screening period was 1996 to 2007. The extent of prostate specific antigen testing was analyzed retrospectively using laboratory databases. The incidence of T1c prostate cancer (impalpable prostate cancer detected by elevated prostate specific antigen) was determined from the national Finnish Cancer Registry. RESULTS: Approximately 1.4% of men had undergone prostate specific antigen testing 1 to 3 years before randomization. By the first 4, 8 and 12 years of followup 18.1%, 47.7% and 62.7% of men in the control arm had undergone prostate specific antigen testing at least once and in the screening arm the proportions were 69.8%, 81.1% and 85.2%, respectively. The cumulative incidence of T1c prostate cancer was 6.1% in the screening arm and 4.5% in the control arm (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.13-1.30). CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of men in the control arm had undergone a prostate specific antigen test during the 15-year followup. Contamination is likely to dilute differences in prostate cancer mortality between the arms in the Finnish screening trial.

Prostate cancer-specific survival among warfarin users in the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) are common in cancer patients and associated with higher mortality. In vivo thrombosis and anticoagulation might be involved in tumor growth and progression. We studied the association of warfarin and other anticoagulant use as antithrombotic medication and prostate cancer (PCa) death in men with the disease. METHODS: The study included 6,537 men diagnosed with PCa during 1995-2009. Information on anticoagulant use was obtained from a national reimbursement registry. Cox regression with adjustment for age, PCa risk group, primary therapy and use of other medication was performed to compare risk of PCa death between warfarin users with 1) men using other types of anticoagulants and 2) non-users of anticoagulants. Medication use was analyzed as a time-dependent variable to minimize immortal time bias. RESULTS: In total, 728 men died from PCa during a median follow-up of 9 years. Compared to anticoagulant non-users, post-diagnostic use of warfarin was associated with an increased risk of PCa death (overall HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.13-1.93). However, this was limited to low-dose, low-intensity use. Otherwise, the risk was similar to anticoagulant non-users. Additionally, we found no risk difference between warfarin and other types of anticoagulants. Pre-diagnostic use of warfarin was not associated with the risk of PCa death. CONCLUSIONS: We found no reduction in risk of PCa death associated with warfarin use. Conversely, the risk was increased in short-term use, which is probably explained by a higher risk of thrombotic events prompting warfarin use in patients with terminal PCa.

5-Alpha reductase inhibitor use and prostate cancer survival in the Finnish Prostate Cancer Screening Trial.

Randomized clinical trials have shown that use of 5α-reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) lowers overall prostate cancer (PCa) risk compared to placebo, while the proportion of Gleason 8-10 tumors is elevated. It is unknown whether this affects PCa-specific survival. We studied disease-specific survival by 5-ARI usage in a cohort of 6,537 prostate cancer cases diagnosed in the Finnish Prostate Cancer Screening Trial and linked to the national prescription database for information on medication use. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for prostate cancer-specific deaths. For comparison, survival among alpha-blocker users was also evaluated. During the median follow-up of 7.5 years after diagnosis a total of 2,478 men died; 617 due to prostate cancer and 1,861 due to other causes. The risk of prostate cancer death did not differ between 5-ARI users and nonusers (multivariable adjusted HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.72-1.24 and HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.69-1.41 for usage before and after the diagnosis, respectively). Alpha-blocker usage both before and after diagnosis was associated with increased risk of prostate cancer death (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.08-1.54 and HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.30-1.86, respectively). The risk increase vanished in long-term alpha-blocker usage. Use of 5-ARIs does not appear to affect prostate cancer mortality when used in management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Increased risk associated with alpha-blocker usage should prompt further exploration on the prognostic role of lower urinary tract symptoms.

Prostate Cancer and Socioeconomic Status in the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

Prostate cancer (PC) screening remains controversial. We investigated whether screening reduces the difference in prostate cancer risk by socioeconomic status (SES). In 1996-2011, a total of 72,139 men from the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer were analyzed. Outcome measures were PC incidence, mortality, and participation in screening. SES indicators were educational level, income, and home ownership status (data obtained from the Statistics Finland registry). The mean duration of follow-up was 12.7 years. Higher SES was associated with a higher incidence of low- to moderate-risk PC but with a lower risk of advanced PC. Higher education was associated with significantly lower PC mortality in both control and screening arms (risk ratio = 0.48-0.69; P < 0.05). Higher income was also associated with lower PC mortality but only in the control arm (risk ratio = 0.45-0.73; P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in SES gradient by arm (Pinteraction = 0.33 and Pinteraction = 0.47 for primary vs. secondary education and primary vs. tertiary education, respectively; Pinteraction = 0.65 and Pinteraction = 0.09 for low vs. intermediate income and low vs. high income, respectively; and Pinteraction = 0.27 among home ownership status strata). Substantial gradients by SES in PC incidence and mortality were observed in the control arm. Higher SES was associated with overdiagnosis of low-risk PC and, conversely, lower risk of incurable PC and lower PC mortality. Special attention should be directed toward recruiting men with low SES to participate in population-based cancer screening.

Digoxin and prostate cancer survival in the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Protective effects have been suggested for digoxin against prostate cancer risk. However, few studies have evaluated the possible effects on prostate cancer-specific survival. We studied the association between use of digoxin or beta-blocker sotalol and prostate cancer-specific survival as compared with users of other antiarrhythmic drugs in a retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Our study population consisted of 6537 prostate cancer cases from the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer diagnosed during 1996-2009 (485 digoxin users). The median exposure for digoxin was 480 DDDs (interquartile range 100-1400 DDDs). During a median follow-up of 7.5 years after diagnosis, 617 men (48 digoxin users) died of prostate cancer. We collected information on antiarrhythmic drug purchases from the national prescription database. Both prediagnostic and postdiagnostic drug usages were analysed using the Cox regression method. RESULTS: No association was found for prostate cancer death with digoxin usage before (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.56-1.80) or after (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.43-1.51) prostate cancer diagnosis. The results were also comparable for sotalol and antiarrhythmic drugs in general. Among men not receiving hormonal therapy, prediagnostic digoxin usage was associated with prolonged prostate cancer survival (HR 0.20, 95% CI 0.05-0.86). CONCLUSIONS: No general protective effects against prostate cancer were observed for digoxin or sotalol usage.