Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening and 15-Year Prostate Cancer Mortality: A Secondary Analysis of the CAP Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer (CAP) reported no effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer mortality at a median 10-year follow-up (primary outcome), but the long-term effects of PSA screening on prostate cancer mortality remain unclear. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a single invitation for PSA screening on prostate cancer-specific mortality at a median 15-year follow-up compared with no invitation for screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of the CAP randomized clinical trial included men aged 50 to 69 years identified at 573 primary care practices in England and Wales. Primary care practices were randomized between September 25, 2001, and August 24, 2007, and men were enrolled between January 8, 2002, and January 20, 2009. Follow-up was completed on March 31, 2021. Intervention: Men received a single invitation for a PSA screening test with subsequent diagnostic tests if the PSA level was 3.0 ng/mL or higher. The control group received standard practice (no invitation). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was reported previously. Of 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, results of 4 were reported previously. The 4 remaining prespecified secondary outcomes at 15-year follow-up were prostate cancer-specific mortality, all-cause mortality, and prostate cancer stage and Gleason grade at diagnosis. Results: Of 415 357 eligible men (mean [SD] age, 59.0 [5.6] years), 98% were included in these analyses. Overall, 12 013 and 12 958 men with a prostate cancer diagnosis were in the intervention and control groups, respectively (15-year cumulative risk, 7.08% [95% CI, 6.95%-7.21%] and 6.94% [95% CI, 6.82%-7.06%], respectively). At a median 15-year follow-up, 1199 men in the intervention group (0.69% [95% CI, 0.65%-0.73%]) and 1451 men in the control group (0.78% [95% CI, 0.73%-0.82%]) died of prostate cancer (rate ratio [RR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99]; P = .03). Compared with the control, the PSA screening intervention increased detection of low-grade (Gleason score [GS] ≤6: 2.2% vs 1.6%; P < .001) and localized (T1/T2: 3.6% vs 3.1%; P < .001) disease but not intermediate (GS of 7), high-grade (GS ≥8), locally advanced (T3), or distally advanced (T4/N1/M1) tumors. There were 45 084 all-cause deaths in the intervention group (23.2% [95% CI, 23.0%-23.4%]) and 50 336 deaths in the control group (23.3% [95% CI, 23.1%-23.5%]) (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.94-1.01]; P = .11). Eight of the prostate cancer deaths in the intervention group (0.7%) and 7 deaths in the control group (0.5%) were related to a diagnostic biopsy or prostate cancer treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, a single invitation for PSA screening compared with standard practice without routine screening reduced prostate cancer deaths at a median follow-up of 15 years. However, the absolute reduction in deaths was small. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN92187251.

Association between atherogenic lipids and GnRH agonists for prostate cancer in men with T2DM: a nationwide, population-based cohort study in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRH) used in prostate cancer (PCa) are associated with atherogenic dyslipidaemia. It can be assumed that GnRH need to be used with greater caution in men with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study investigated association of GnRH with atherogenic lipids (AL) in PCa men with T2DM. METHODS: Two cohorts including 38,311 men with 11 years follow-up based on Swedish national registers were defined (PCa-Exposure cohort and GnRH-Exposure cohort). Based on European guidelines on cardiovascular diseases (CVD), primary outcomes were defined as: 1.0 mmol/L increase in AL and lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) intensification. We used Cox proportional-hazards models and Kaplan-Meier curves to assess the association. RESULTS: There was an association between GnRH and increased AL (i.e., triglyceride, PCa-Exposure cohort: HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.48-2.10; GnRH-Exposure cohort: HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.38-2.57). There was also an association between PCa diagnosis and increased AL. In contrast, no association between LLT intensification and GnRH was found. CONCLUSION: In this large population-based study, men with T2DM on GnRH for PCa had an increased risk of increased atherogenic lipids. These results highlight the need to closely monitor lipids and to be ready to intensify lipid-lowering therapy in men with T2DM on GnRH for PCa.

Magnetic resonance imaging of the knee for chronological age estimation-a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Radiographs of the hand and teeth are frequently used for medical age assessment, as skeletal and dental maturation correlates with chronological age. These methods have been criticized for their lack of precision, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the knee has been proposed as a more accurate method. The aim of this systematic review is to explore the scientific and statistical evidence for medical age estimation based on skeletal maturation as assessed by MRI of the knee. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted that included studies published before April 2021 on living individuals between 8 and 30 years old, with presumptively healthy knees for whom the ossification stages had been evaluated using MRI. The correlation between "mature knee" and chronological age and the risk of misclassifying a child as an adult and vice versa was calculated. RESULTS: We found a considerable heterogeneity in the published studies -in terms of study population, MRI protocols, and grading systems used. There is a wide variation in the correlation between maturation stage and chronological age. CONCLUSION: Data from published literature is deemed too heterogenous to support the use of MRI of the knee for chronological age determination. Further, it is not possible to assess the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, or positive predictive value for the ability of MRI to determine whether a person is over or under 18 years old. KEY POINTS: • There is an insufficient scientific basis for the use of magnetic resonance imaging of the knee in age determination by skeleton. • It is not possible to assess the predictive value of MRI of the knee to determine whether a person is over or under 18 years of age.

A systematic review of hormone treatment for children with gender dysphoria and recommendations for research.

AIM: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effects on psychosocial and mental health, cognition, body composition, and metabolic markers of hormone treatment in children with gender dysphoria. METHODS: Systematic review essentially follows PRISMA. We searched PubMed, EMBASE and thirteen other databases until 9 November 2021 for English-language studies of hormone therapy in children with gender dysphoria. Of 9934 potential studies identified with abstracts reviewed, 195 were assessed in full text, and 24 were relevant. RESULTS: In 21 studies, adolescents were given gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHa) treatment. In three studies, cross-sex hormone treatment (CSHT) was given without previous GnRHa treatment. No randomised controlled trials were identified. The few longitudinal observational studies were hampered by small numbers and high attrition rates. Hence, the long-term effects of hormone therapy on psychosocial health could not be evaluated. Concerning bone health, GnRHa treatment delays bone maturation and bone mineral density gain, which, however, was found to partially recover during CSHT when studied at age 22 years. CONCLUSION: Evidence to assess the effects of hormone treatment on the above fields in children with gender dysphoria is insufficient. To improve future research, we present the GENDHOR checklist, a checklist for studies in gender dysphoria.

Exploring the association between use of gonadotropin releasing hormones agonists and prostate cancer diagnosis per se and diabetes control in men with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a nationwide, population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Gonadotropin Releasing Hormones agonists (GnRH), which are first line treatment for metastatic prostate cancer (PCa), increase risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study aims to quantify the association of use of GnRH with diabetes control in PCa men with T2DM. METHODS: Nationwide population-based cohort study in the Swedish National Diabetes Register and Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden 4.1, on the association between GnRH and diabetes control in T2DM men with PCa by comparing T2DM men with PCa vs. without PCa, as well as comparing T2DM men with PCa on or not on GnRH. The primary exposure was use of GnRH. Worsening diabetes control was the primary outcome, defined as: 1) HbA1c rose to 58 mmol/mol or higher; 2) HbA1c increase by 10 mmol/mol or more; 3) Start of antidiabetic drugs or switch to insulin. We also combined all above definitions. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to analyze the association. RESULTS: There were 5714 T2DM men with PCa of whom 692 were on GnRH and 28,445 PCa-free men with T2DM with similar baseline characteristics. Diabetes control was worse in men with GnRH vs. PCa-free men (HR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.13-1.34) as well as compared with PCa men without GnRH (HR:1.58, 95% CI: 1.39-1.80), when we defined the worsening control of diabetes by combining all definitions above. CONCLUSION: Use of GnRH in T2DM men with PCa was associated with worse glycemic control. The findings highlight the need to closely monitor diabetes control in men with T2DM and PCa starting GnRH.

Guideline-based quality assurance: a conceptual framework for the definition of key elements.

BACKGROUND: In 2017, the European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) started developing a methodological framework for a guideline-based quality assurance (QA) scheme to improve cancer quality of care. During the first phase of the work, inconsistency emerged about the use of terminology for the definition, the conceptual underpinnings and the way QA relates to health questions that are answered in guidelines. The objective of this final of three articles is to propose a conceptual framework for an integrated approach to guideline and QA development and clarify terms and definitions for key elements. This work will inform the upcoming European Commission Initiative on Colorectal Cancer (ECICC). METHODS: A multidisciplinary group of 23 experts from key organizations in the fields of guideline development, performance measurement and quality assurance participated in a mixed method approach including face-to-face dialogue and several rounds of virtual meetings. Informed by results of a systematic literature review that indicated absence of an existing framework and practical examples, we first identified the relations of key elements in guideline-based QA and then developed appropriate concepts and terminology to provide guidance. RESULTS: Our framework connects the three key concepts of quality indicators, performance measures and performance indicators integrated with guideline development. Quality indicators are constructs used as a guide to monitor, evaluate, and improve the quality of the structure, process and outcomes of healthcare services; performance measures are tools that quantify or describe measurable elements of practice performance; and performance indicators are quantifiable and measurable units or scores of practice, which should be guided by guideline recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The inconsistency in the way key terms of QA are used and defined has confused the field. Our conceptual framework defines the role, meaning and interactions of the key elements for improving quality in healthcare. It directly builds on the questions asked in guidelines and answered through recommendations. These findings will be applied in the forthcoming ECICC and for the future updates of ECIBC. These are large-scale integrated projects aimed at improving healthcare quality across Europe through the development of guideline-based QA schemes; this will help in implementing and improving our approach.

Bringing two worlds closer together: a critical analysis of an integrated approach to guideline development and quality assurance schemes.

BACKGROUND: Although quality indicators are frequently derived from guidelines, there is a substantial gap in collaboration between the corresponding parties. To optimise workflow, guideline recommendations and quality assurance should be aligned methodologically and practically. Learning from the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC), our objective was to bring the key knowledge and most important considerations from both worlds together to inform European Commission future initiatives. METHODS: We undertook several steps to address the problem. First, we conducted a feasibility study that included a survey, interviews and a review of manuals for an integrated guideline and quality assurance (QA) scheme that would support the European Commission. The feasibility study drew from an assessment of the ECIBC experience that followed commonly applied strategies leading to separation of the guideline and QA development processes. Secondly, we used results of a systematic review to inform our understanding of methodologies for integrating guideline and QA development. We then, in a third step, used the findings to prepare an evidence brief and identify key aspects of a methodological framework for integrating guidelines QA through meetings with key informants. RESULTS: Seven key themes emerged to be taken into account for integrating guidelines and QA schemes: (1) evidence-based integrated guideline and QA frameworks are possible, (2) transparency is key in clearly documenting the source and rationale for quality indicators, (3) intellectual and financial interests should be declared and managed appropriately, (4) selection processes and criteria for quality indicators need further refinement, (5) clear guidance on retirement of quality indicators should be included, (6) risks of an integrated guideline and QA Group can be mitigated, and (7) an extension of the GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist should incorporate QA considerations. DISCUSSION: We concluded that the work of guideline and QA developers can be integrated under a common methodological framework and we provided key findings and recommendations. These two worlds, that are fundamental to improving health, can both benefit from integration.

Association of type 2 diabetes mellitus and antidiabetic medication with risk of prostate cancer: a population-based case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are prevalent conditions that often occur concomitantly. However, many aspects of the impact of T2DM, particularly the duration of T2DM and antidiabetic medications, on PCa risk are poorly understood. METHODS: To assess the association of duration of T2DM and antidiabetic medication with PCa risk, we designed a matched case-control study, including 31,415 men with PCa and 154,812 PCa-free men in Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe) 4.1. RESULTS: Overall, a decreased risk of PCa was observed for men with T2DM (odds ratio (OR): 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78-0.84), as compared to men without T2DM. The decreased risk of PCa was consistently showed across duration of T2DM. With respect to use of antidiabetic drugs, this inverse association with duration was also found for all medications types, as compared to men without T2DM, including insulin, metformin and sulphonylurea (SU) (e.g. 3- < 5 yr insulin OR:0.69, 95%CI:0.60-0.80; 3- < 5 yr metformin OR: 0.82, 95%CI: 0.74-0.91; 3- < 5 yr SU OR: 0.72, 95%CI: 0.62-0.83). When stratifying by PCa risk categories, this decreased risk was most evident for diagnosis of low and intermediate-risk PCa (low-risk OR: 0.65, 95%CI: 0.66-0.70, intermediate-risk OR: 0.80, 95%CI: 0.75-0.85). CONCLUSIONS: The study showed an inverse association between pre-existing T2DM and PCa across different durations of T2DM and all types of T2DM medication received. This inverse association was most evident for low- and intermediate-risk PCa, suggesting that whilst T2DM and its medication may protect some men from developing PCa, the relationship warrants further study.

Chronic inflammatory diseases, anti-inflammatory medications and risk of prostate cancer: a population-based case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Whether chronic inflammation increases prostate cancer risk remains unclear. This study investigated whether chronic inflammatory diseases (CID) or anti-inflammatory medication use (AIM) were associated with prostate cancer risk. METHODS: Fifty-five thousand nine hundred thirty-seven cases (all prostate cancer, 2007-2012) and 279,618 age-matched controls were selected from the Prostate Cancer Database Sweden. CIDs and AIMs was determined from national patient and drug registers. Associations were investigated using conditional logistic regression, including for disease/drug subtypes and exposure length/dose. RESULTS: Men with a history of any CID had slightly increased risk of any prostate cancer diagnosis (OR: 1.08; 95%CI: 1.04-1.12) but not 'unfavourable' (high-risk or advanced) prostate cancer. Generally, risk of prostate cancer was highest for shorter exposure times. However, a positive association was observed for asthma > 5 years before prostate cancer diagnosis (OR: 1.21; 95%CI: 1.05-1.40). Risk of prostate cancer was increased with prior use of any AIMs (OR: 1.26; 95%CI: 1.24-1.29). A positive trend with increasing cumulative dose was only observed for inhaled glucocorticoids (p < 0.011). CONCLUSION: Detection bias most likely explains the elevated risk of prostate cancer with prior history of CIDs or use of AIMs, given the higher risk immediately after first CID event and lack of dose response. However, findings for length of time with asthma and dose of inhaled glucocorticoids suggest that asthma may increase risk of prostate cancer through other pathways.

Androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer and risk of dementia.

OBJECTIVES: To study whether androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), the mainstay treatment for advanced and disseminated prostate cancer, is associated with risk of dementia. METHODS: Risk of dementia in men with prostate cancer primarily managed with ADT or watchful waiting (WW) in the Prostate Cancer Database Sweden, PCBaSe, was compared with that in prostate cancer-free men, matched on birth year and county of residency. We used Cox regression to calculate the hazard ratios (HRs) for Alzheimer's and non-Alzheimer's dementia (vascular dementia, dementia secondary to other diseases or unspecified dementias) for different types and duration of ADT and oral antiandrogens (AAs) as well as for men managed with WW. RESULTS: A total of 25 967 men with prostate cancer and 121 018 prostate cancer-free men were followed for a median of 4 years. In both groups 6% of the men were diagnosed with dementia. In men with prostate cancer, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist treatment ( HR 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-1.23) and orchiectomy (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.32-1.93) were associated with an increased risk of dementia, as compared to no treatment in prostate cancer-free men; however, this increase in risk was only observed for non-Alzheimer's dementia and occurred from year 1-4 after start of ADT. No increase in risk for any type of dementia was observed for men treated with AAs or for men on WW. CONCLUSION: This population-based cohort study does not support previous observations of an increased risk of Alzheimer's dementia for men on ADT; however, there was a small increase in risk of non-Alzheimer's dementia.

Anti-androgen monotherapy versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists in men with advanced, non-metastatic prostate cancer: a register-based, observational study.

BACKGROUND: In randomised controlled trials, men with advanced, non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) treated with anti-androgen monotherapy (AA) had similar all-cause mortality as men treated with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists. Using real-world evidence (i.e., observational data), we aimed to further assess the difference in mortality between these two drug categories. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We emulated a trial using data from Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden 3.0. We specifically focused on men diagnosed in 2006-2012 with high-risk PCa who had no distant metastasis. They either received primary hormonal therapy with AA (n = 2078) or GnRH agonists (n = 4878) who were followed for a median time of 5 years. Risk of death from PCa and other causes was assessed using competing risk analyses and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses, including propensity score matching. RESULTS: The cumulative 5-year PCa mortality was lower for men treated with AA (16% [95% confidence interval, CI, 15-18%]) than men treated with GnRH agonists (22% [95% CI 21-24%]). The 5-year other cause mortality was also lower for men on AA (17% [95% CI 15-19%] compared to men on GnRH agonists (27% [95% CI 25-28%]). In regression analyses, the risk of PCa death was similar, GnRH agonists versus AA (reference), hazard ratio (HR) 1.08 (95% CI 0.95-1.23), but the risk of death from all causes was higher for men on GnRH agonists, HR 1.23 (95% CI 1.13-1.34). Consistent results were seen in the propensity score-matched cohort. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the use of AA as primary hormonal therapy in men with high-risk non-metastatic PCa does not increase PCa-specific mortality compared to GnRH. Using AA instead of GnRH agonists may result in shorter time on/exposure to GnRH-treatment, which may reduce the risk of adverse events associated with this treatment.

Is there any association between prostate-specific antigen screening frequency and uptake of active surveillance in men with low or very low risk prostate cancer?

BACKGROUND: Patient-related factors such as concern about cancer are believed to influence both men's decisions to undergo prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing and to have definitive treatment if diagnosed with low risk prostate cancer (PCa). The potential link between screening frequency and choice of active surveillance (AS) for low risk disease has not been studied previously. Our aim was to investigate whether there is any association between PCa screening frequency or previous negative prostate biopsy and uptake of AS among men with low risk PCa. METHODS: This register-based study included all men ≤75 years from Stockholm who were diagnosed with low risk PCa from 2008 to 2014 (n = 4336). Pre-diagnostic PSA testing and biopsy histories were obtained from the Stockholm PSA and Biopsy Register, a population-based register for the Stockholm country. The association between previous screening/biopsy history and AS uptake (based on primary treatment recorded in the National Prostate Cancer Register) was examined using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Forty seven percent of men with low risk PCa underwent AS. Uptake was associated with older age, very low risk disease, more recent diagnosis and absence of family history. None of the screening/biopsy measures (testing frequency, mean interval, PSA velocity, highest pre-diagnostic PSA or prior negative biopsy) were associated with uptake of AS among men with low risk PCa. Generalisability to settings with different policies and practices may be limited. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence that screening frequency and negative biopsy influence uptake of AS among Swedish men with low risk PCa. Further research is required to determine factors that still present barriers for men taking up AS.

Association between type 2 diabetes, curative treatment and survival in men with intermediate- and high-risk localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether curative prostate cancer (PCa) treatment was received less often by men with both PCa and Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) as little is known about the influence of T2DM diagnosis on the receipt of such treatment in men with localized PCa. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The Prostate Cancer database Sweden (PCBaSe) was used to obtain data on men with T2DM and PCa (n = 2210) for comparison with data on men with PCa only (n = 23 071). All men had intermediate- (T1-2, Gleason score 7 and/or prostate-specific antigen [PSA] 10-20 ng/mL) or high-risk (T3 and/or Gleason score 8-10 and/or PSA 20-50 ng/mL) localized PCa diagnosed between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2014. Multivariate logistic regression was used to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) for receipt of curative treatment in men with and without T2DM. Overall survival, for up to 8 years of follow-up, was calculated both for men with T2DM only and for men with T2DM and PCa. RESULTS: Men with T2DM were less likely to receive curative treatment for PCa than men without T2DM (OR 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.87). The 8-year overall survival rates were 79% and 33% for men with T2DM and high-risk PCa who did and did not receive curative treatment, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Men with T2DM were less likely to receive curative treatment for localized intermediate- and high-risk PCa. Men with T2DM and high-risk PCa who received curative treatment had substantially higher survival times than those who did not. Some of the survival differences represent a selection bias, whereby the healthiest patients received curative treatment. Clinicians should interpret this data carefully and ensure that individual patients with T2DM and PCa are not under- nor overtreated.

Drugs for metabolic conditions and prostate cancer death in men on GnRH agonists.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether drugs for metabolic conditions influence prostate cancer-specific mortality in men starting gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, as it is unclear whether metabolic syndrome and its related drugs is affecting treatment response in men with prostate cancer on GnRH agonists. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We selected all men receiving GnRH agonists as primary treatment in the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe) (n = 9267). Use of drugs for metabolic conditions (i.e. anti-diabetes, anti-dyslipidaemia, and antihypertension) in relation to all-cause, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and prostate cancer-specific death were studied using multivariate Cox proportional hazard and Fine and Gray competing regression models. RESULTS: In all, 6322 (68%) men used at least one drug for a metabolic condition at GnRH agonist initiation: 46% on antihypertensive drugs only, 32% on drugs for dyslipidaemia and hypertension, and ~10% on drugs for more than two metabolic conditions. Cox models indicated a weak increased risk of prostate cancer death in men who were on drugs for hypertension only (hazard ratio [HR] 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.23) or drugs for hyperglycaemia (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.06-1.35) at GnRH agonist initiation. However, upon taking into account competing risk from CVD death, none of the drugs for metabolic conditions were associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer death. CONCLUSION: We did not find evidence for a better or worse response to GnRH agonists in men with prostate cancer who were also on drugs for hypertension, dyslipidaemia, or hyperglycaemia.

Effects of pre-notification, invitation length, questionnaire length and reminder on participation rate: a quasi-randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Improving participation rates in epidemiologic studies using questionnaires and biological sampling is important for the generalizability of the outcome. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of pre-notification, invitation length, questionnaire length, and reminder on participation rate and to investigate whether some factors contributed to participants doing both the questionnaire and blood sampling as oppose to only one part. METHODS: Our study was embedded within the pilot testing of a large population-based study about prostate cancer screening. Our study sample consisted of 28.134 men between 50 and 69 years of age and living in the region of Stockholm (Sweden) invited to respond to a web-based questionnaire and to provide blood for prostate cancer testing. The men were randomly allocated according to birth of date to receive either: (a) a pre-notification postcard or not; (b) a shorter or a longer invitation letter; (c) a shorter or a longer web-based questionnaire, and (d) a reminder or not. The effects of the survey design factors were tested using chi-square. RESULTS: The use of a pre-notification (p < 0.0001), a longer questionnaire (p = 0.004) and the use of a reminder (p = 0.02) were associated with an increase in overall participation, i.e. responding to the questionnaire or providing blood for PCT or performing both components. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this pilot study justified the use of a pre-notification and a reminder in the following large population based study since the benefits of increased participation traded off against the greater costs incurred. Furthermore, we were able to use the longer version of the questionnaire, which allowed us to collect more information without risking a lower response rate.

Cancer Specific Mortality in Men Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer before Age 50 Years: A Nationwide Population Based Study.

PURPOSE: We compared clinical characteristics and cancer specific mortality in men diagnosed with prostate cancer before vs after age 50 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 919 men 35 to 49 years old and 45,098 men 50 to 66 years old who were diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1998 and 2012 were identified in PCBaSe (Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden). Cancer specific mortality was compared among age groups (35 to 49, 50 to 59, 60 to 63 and 64 to 66 years) with and without adjusting for cancer characteristics, comorbidity and education in a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Clinical cancer characteristics indicated that most nonmetastatic cancer in men younger than 50 years was detected after prostate specific antigen testing. The proportion of nonmetastatic vs metastatic disease at diagnosis was similar in all age groups. A strong association between younger age and poor prognosis was apparent in men in whom metastatic disease was diagnosed before age 50 to 55 years. The crude and adjusted HRs of cancer specific mortality were 1.41 (95% CI 1.12-1.79) and 1.28 (95% CI 1.01-1.62) in men diagnosed before age 50 and at age 50 to 59 years, respectively. In men with nonmetastatic disease crude cancer specific mortality increased with older age but adjusted cancer specific mortality was similar in all age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that an aggressive form of metastatic prostate cancer is particularly common in men younger than 50 to 55 years. Genetic studies and trials of intensified systemic treatment are warranted in this patient group.

Effects of increasing the PSA cutoff to perform additional biomarker tests before prostate biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Multi-step testing might enhance performance of the prostate cancer diagnostic pipeline. Using PSA >1 ng/ml for first-line risk stratification and the Stockholm 3 Model (S3M) blood-test >10% risk of Gleason Score > 7 prostate cancer to inform biopsy decisions has been suggested. We aimed to determine the effects of changing the PSA cutoff to perform reflex testing with S3M and the subsequent S3M cutoff to recommend prostate biopsy while maintaining the sensitivity to detect Gleason Score ≥ 7 prostate cancer. METHODS: We used data from the prospective, population-based, paired, diagnostic Stockholm 3 (STHLM3) study with participants invited by date of birth from the Swedish Population Register during 2012-2014. All participants underwent testing with PSA and S3M (a combination of plasma protein biomarkers [PSA, free PSA, intact PSA, hK2, MSMB, MIC1], genetic polymorphisms, and clinical variables [age, family, history, previous prostate biopsy, prostate exam]). Of 47,688 men in the STHLM3 main study, we used data from 3133 men with S3M >10% and prostate biopsy data. Logistic regression models were used to calculate prostate cancer detection rates and proportion saved biopsies. RESULTS: 44.2%, 62.5% and 67.9% of the participants had PSA <1, <1.5 and <1.7 ng/ml, respectively. Increasing the PSA cut-off for additional work-up from 1 ng/ml to 1.5 ng/ml would thus save 18.3% of the performed tests, 4.9% of the biopsies and 1.3% (10/765) of Gleason Grade ≥ 7 cancers would be un-detected. By lowering the S3M cutoff to recommend biopsy, sensitivity to high-grade prostate cancer can be restored, to the cost of increasing the number of performed biopsies modestly. CONCLUSION: The sensitivity to detect prostate cancer can be maintained when using different PSA cutoffs to perform additional testing. Biomarker cut-offs have implications on number of tests and prostate biopsies performed. A PSA cutoff of 1.5 ng/ml to perform additional testing such as the S3M test might be considered. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN84445406 .

Waiting times for cancer patients in Sweden: A nationwide population-based study.

AIMS: The reported long waiting times for cancer patients have mostly been related to prognostic outcome and less to patient-related experience to outcome. We assessed waiting times for patients with cancer of the breast, prostate, colon or rectum in Sweden. METHODS: The median time from referral to start of treatment was assessed using data from clinical cancer registers for patients who received curative treatment during 2011, 2012 and 2013. RESULTS: The median overall waiting time in different counties ranged from 7 to 28 days for breast cancer, from 117 to 280 days for prostate cancer, from 27 to 64 days for colon cancer and from 48 to 80 days for rectal cancer. For the entire nation, the median time from referral to start of treatment remained unchanged from 2011 to 2013 for each cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Large variations were found in waiting times between different counties in Sweden and between different types of cancer. The long waiting times identified in this study emphasize the need to improve national programmes for more rapid diagnosis and treatment.

Association between duration and type of androgen deprivation therapy and risk of diabetes in men with prostate cancer.

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PCa) increases risk of type 2 diabetes (T2DM); however the association between types and duration of ADT has not been fully elucidated. We examined how type and duration of ADT affects risk of T2DM. Using data from Prostate Cancer database Sweden (PCBaSe) we investigated risk of T2DM in a cohort of 34,031 men with PCa on ADT; i.e., anti-androgens (AA), orchiectomy, or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists compared to an age-matched, PCa-free comparison cohort (n = 167,205) using multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression. T2DM was defined as a newly filled prescription for metformin, sulphonylurea, or insulin in the Prescribed Drug Register. A total of 21,874 men with PCa received GnRH agonists, 9,143 AA and 3,014 underwent orchiectomy. Risk of T2DM was increased in men in the GnRH agonists/orchiectomy group during the first 3 years of ADT [i.e., 1 - 1.5 years HR: 1.61 (95%CI: 1.36 - 1.91)], compared to PCa-free men. The risk decreased thereafter (e.g., 3 - 4 years HR: 1.17 (95% CI: 0.98 - 1.40)). Conversely, no increased risk was seen in men on AA (HR: 0.74 (95%CI: 0.65 - 0.84). The incidence of T2DM per 1,000 person-years was 10 for PCa-free men, 8 for men on AA, and 13 for men on GnRH agonists/orchiectomy. Duration of ADT has a significant impact on risk of T2DM. With the peak after three years of treatment, our data indicates that men on ADT, even for a limited period of time, such as adjuvant to radiotherapy, are at increased risk of T2DM.