[Prostate cancer - from the patients' perspective]. / Prostatacancer ur patienternas perspektiv.

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer among Swedish men. To get this diagnose is not only a threat to the men's lives but also to their quality of life because the treatment often affects sexuality, bladder function and bowel function. It is therefore particularly problematic that the rehabilitation of men after treatment for prostate cancer often does not reach the standards set out in the national guidelines. Despite the past years' promotion of standardized cancer care pathways to speed up the process of investigating and treating cancer, the lead times for men who are being investigated for a suspicion of prostate cancer, or are waiting for a planned prostate cancer treatment, are the longest in Swedish cancer care. Patients' organisations are currently active in all 21 Swedish regions to support men with prostate cancer and their near ones. Their national umbrella organisation is increasingly involved in various healthcare organisations, such as the National Prostate Cancer Guidelines Group, and supports clinical prostate cancer research.

[Prostate cancer - a disease in transformation]. / Prostatacancer ­ sjukdom i förändring.

This article introduces a series of articles covering some of the most important aspects of contemporary prostate cancer care. After the introduction of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood test and systematic prostate biopsies in the early 1990s, the incidence of localised prostate cancer and the use of radical treatment rose dramatically. Improved diagnostic methods and understanding of the tumour biology now reduce overdiagnosis and pave the way for organised screening. New and more effective treatments, in combination with the stage shift from advanced to localised disease at the time of diagnosis, have reduced the age-standardised prostate cancer specific mortality by half in men under the age of 85 years. The National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden (NPCR) has evolved over the past 25 years and now comprehensively supports clinical care and is an invaluable research data source. Patients' organisations have emerged as important players on the national arena.

[Treatment of non-metastatic prostate cancer]. / Behandling av icke spridd prostatacancer ­ individuellt val.

There is a long history of curative treatment of prostate cancer. However, as prostate cancer often grows very slowly, and symptoms do not have time to develop during a person's lifetime, a more tentative approach has become more and more common in many cases. This may be through either watchful waiting or active surveillance. In the first case palliative hormonal treatment is given in the case of progression, in the latter curative treatment would be the choice. When treatment is deemed necessary for localized disease, surgery and radiotherapy are considered equivalent in terms of efficacy and overall risk of side effects. For locally advanced disease, radiotherapy is the recommended first-hand choice outside the SPCG 15 study. Focal treatment, which may lead to less side effects than surgery or radiotherapy, is not recommended outside trial settings due to lack of long-term follow-up data.

[Prostate cancer - diagnostics and screening]. / Prostatacancer ­ utredning, klinisk diagnostik och screening.

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) based screening is controversial, even though randomised trials show that screening can reduce prostate cancer mortality. The main reason is that screening leads to overdiagnosis of indolent cancers that would never have surfaced clinically in the absence of screening. Recently, several large studies have shown that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) improves prostate cancer diagnostics. With MRI, up to half of all men with elevated PSA values can be spared a biopsy. When a biopsy is needed, the needles can be directed towards the suspicious area in the prostate, which increases the detection of clinically significant tumors. In Sweden, regional programmes with organised prostate cancer testing were introduced in 2020. These programmes aim to make prostate cancer testing more standardized, efficient, and equitable. In the future, biomarkers and AI-based systems will likely be important to further improve prostate cancer diagnostics.

Normalised repeat serum prostate-specific antigen: associations with age and magnetic resonance imaging results.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the value of a repeat prostate-specific antigen measurement (PSA2) before magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in men with a raised PSA (PSA1) <10 µg/L. METHOD: Medical records of men aged < 75 years referred in 2021 for PSA1 3.0-9.9 µg/L (< 70 years) or 5.0-9.9 µg/L (70-74 years) were reviewed. PSA2 was sampled before MRI within 60 days from PSA1. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated with logistic regression. Chi-square and trend-test were used for categorical variables. RESULTS: A total of 341 men were included. Median time between PSA1 and PSA2 was 28 days (interquartile range 20-35 days). PSA normalised in 16% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 13-21). Younger men were more likely to have a normal PSA2 (OR: 0.95 per year older, 95% CI: 0.92-0.99). Among men aged < 70 years, those with PSA1 < 5 µg/L were more likely to have normalised PSA2 than those with PSA1 ≥ 5 µg/L (21% vs. 10%, p = 0.01). A greater proportion of men with normalised PSA2 had a Prostate Imaging Data and Reporting System MRI score of 1-3 than men with non-normalised PSA2 (93% vs. 77%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A clinically significant proportion of men with a moderately raised PSA value have a normal PSA2. Younger men and men with lower PSA1 were more likely to have a normal PSA2. Few men with normalised PSA2 had suspicious MRI findings. Routine repeat PSA-testing may be motivated in men with a moderately raised PSA value to save MRI resources, particularly in younger men.

Time trends in the use of curative treatment in men 70 years and older with nonmetastatic prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Undertreatment of otherwise healthy men in their seventies with prostate cancer has been reported previously. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Using information in a Swedish prostate cancer research database, patterns of management and cancer-specific mortality were compared across age groups in over 70,000 men diagnosed with intermediate- or high-risk nonmetastatic prostate cancer between 2008 and 2020. Crude probabilities of death were estimated non-parametrically. Staging procedures, primary treatment, and cancer death were compared using regression models, adjusting for patient and tumor characteristics. RESULTS: During the study period, the proportion of men treated with curative intent increased in ages 70-74 (intermediate-risk from 45% to 72% and high-risk from 49% to 84%), 75-79 (intermediate-risk from 11% to 52% and high-risk from 12% to 70%), and 80-84 years (intermediate-risk from < 1% to 14% and high-risk from < 1% to 30%). Older age was associated with lower likelihoods of staging investigations and curative treatment, also after adjustment for tumor characteristics and comorbidity. Men treated with curative intent and those initially managed conservatively had lower crude risks of prostate cancer death than men receiving androgen deprivation treatment (ADT). In adjusted analyses, ADT was associated with higher prostate cancer mortality than curative treatment across ages and risk groups. Among men managed conservatively, prostate cancer mortality was higher in ages 70 and above. INTERPRETATION: Use of curative treatment increased substantially in older men with prostate cancer between 2008 and 2020. Our findings suggest reduced age-bias and under-treatment, likely reflecting improved individualized decision-making and adherence to guidelines recommending more active management of older men.

Socioeconomic inequality in prostate cancer diagnostics, primary treatment, rehabilitation, and mortality in Sweden.

We designed a nationwide study to investigate the association between socioeconomic factors (household income and education) and different aspects of prostate cancer care, considering both individual- and neighbourhood-level variables. Data were obtained from Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe), a research database with data from several national health care registers including clinical characteristics and treatments for nearly all men diagnosed with prostate cancer in Sweden. Four outcomes were analysed: use of pre-biopsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in 2018-2020 (n = 11,843), primary treatment of high-risk non-metastatic disease in 2016-2020 (n = 6633), rehabilitation (≥2 dispensed prescriptions for erectile dysfunction within 1 year from surgery in 2016-2020, n = 6505), and prostate cancer death in 7770 men with high-risk non-metastatic disease diagnosed in 2010-2016. Unadjusted and adjusted odds and hazard ratios (OR/HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Adjusted odds ratio (ORs) comparing low versus high individual education were 0.74 (95% CI 0.66-0.83) for pre-biopsy MRI, 0.66 (0.54-0.81) for primary treatment, and 0.82 (0.69-0.97) for rehabilitation. HR gradients for prostate cancer death were significant on unadjusted analysis only (low vs. high individual education HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.17-1.70); co-variate adjustments markedly attenuated the gradients (low vs. high individual education HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.90-1.35). Generally, neighbourhood-level analyses showed weaker gradients over the socioeconomic strata, except for pre-biopsy MRI. Socioeconomic factors influenced how men were diagnosed with prostate cancer in Sweden but had less influence on subsequent specialist care. Neighbourhood-level socioeconomic data are more useful for evaluating inequality in diagnostics than in later specialist care.

Population-based Organised Prostate Cancer Testing: Results from the First Invitation of 50-year-old Men.

BACKGROUND: The European Union recently recommended evaluation of the feasibility of organised prostate cancer screening. In Sweden, regional population-based organised prostate cancer testing (OPT) programmes were introduced in 2020. OBJECTIVE: To describe initial participation rates and diagnostic outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The three most populated Swedish regions invited all men aged 50 yr to OPT by a letter in 2020-2022. Men with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥3 ng/ml were referred for prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). PSA assays differed across regions. Men with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 1-3 and PSA density ≥0.15 ng/ml/cm3 or PI-RADS 4-5 were referred for a biopsy. Data were obtained from the Swedish Register for Organised Prostate Cancer Testing. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall and regional participation rates, PSA distributions, PI-RADS score distributions, cancer detection, and treatment were evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 23 855 (35%) of 68 060 invited men participated; 696 (2.9%) had PSA ≥3 ng/ml, and of them, 306 (44%) had a biopsy indication and 221 (32%) had a biopsy. On biopsy, 93 (42%) had Gleason grade group ≥2 (0.39% of PSA-tested men) and 44 (20%) Gleason grade group 1 cancer. Most men with cancer had treatment with curative intent (70%) or were under active surveillance (28%). Across regions, proportions of men with PSA ≥3 ng/ml ranged from 2.3% to 4.0%, and those with PI-RADS score 4-5 ranged from 12% to 21%. A limitation is that results are applicable only to first testing of men in their early 50s. CONCLUSIONS: The OPT programmes are feasible with good compliance to the diagnostic pathway. The use of MRI and PSA density avoided a biopsy for over half of the men with PSA ≥3 ng/ml. Inter-regional differences in diagnostic outcomes show a need for standardisation of the diagnostic pathway's components. PATIENT SUMMARY: We report the diagnostic outcomes of inviting 68 000 50-yr-old men to organised prostate cancer testing.

Family History and Risk of Renal Cell Carcinoma: A National Multiregister Case-Control Study.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to investigate the association between family history of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and RCC risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: RCC cases diagnosed in Sweden between 2005 and 2014 and 10 matched controls were identified using the Renal Cell Cancer Database Sweden, with linkage to the Multigeneration Register and the Swedish Cancer Registry. The association between a family history of RCC and RCC was investigated, overall and by sex and age groups. RESULTS: Among 9416 RCC cases, 294 (3.1%) had 1 or more parent or sibling (first-degree relative [FDR]) with RCC. Median age at diagnosis for cases with an affected FDR was 65 years (IQR 59-71) and 68 years (IQR 60-75) for all cases. The proportion of women was significantly higher among familial RCC compared to sporadic RCC (44.6% vs 38.5%, P = .035). RCC was twice as likely with 1 or more FDR with RCC (OR 1.9; CI 1.65-2.16). Stratified analysis showed an OR of 2.4 for women (CI 1.93-2.92) and 1.6 for men (CI 1.35-1.93). Two or more FDRs was associated with a sixfold increased risk (95% CI 2.37-15.5). Familial RCC was strongly associated with bilateral and multifocal tumors (OR 5.5; CI 2.36-13.0, OR 3.5; CI 1.89-6.49). CONCLUSIONS: In this Swedish data set, 3.1% of RCC patients have 1 or more FDR diagnosed with RCC. There was no statistical difference in median age between sporadic RCC and familial RCC. Having 1 or more FDR with RCC approximately doubles the risk of RCC with a higher risk increase for women than for men. People with 2 FDRs with RCC constitute a small high-risk group that may benefit from screening.

How to follow the new EU Council recommendation and improve prostate cancer early detection: the Prostaforum 2022 declaration.

An updated Council of the EU recommendation on cancer screening was adopted in December 2022 during the Czech EU presidency. The recommendation included prostate cancer as a suitable target disease for organised screening, and invited countries to proceed with piloting and further research. To support further discussions and actions to promote early detection of prostate cancer, an international conference in November 2022 (Prostaforum 2022) resulted in a joint declaration. Here we describe the EU policy background, summarise the preparation of the declaration and the key underlying evidence and expert recommendations, and report the text of the declaration. The declaration summarises the striking inequalities in prostate cancer burden in Europe and calls on all stakeholders to consider and support concrete steps for advancement of organised early detection of prostate cancer. Our aim is to request endorsement of the text and potential initiation of practical actions by all stakeholders to support the aims of the declaration. Patient summary: Prostate cancer is among the most frequent cancers and is one of the most common causes of cancer death among men. The European Union has recommended new pilot programmes for prostate cancer screening. The Prostaforum 2022 declaration invites all stakeholders to support this new recommendation with specific steps.

Men's Perception of Being Invited for Prostate Cancer Testing and the Information About Its Pros and Cons-A Survey from Two Population-based Testing Programmes.

Background: There is no national screening programme for prostate cancer in Sweden. Instead, population-based organised prostate cancer testing (OPT) projects are introduced to make information and testing more equal and effective. Objective: To evaluate men's perception of being invited to OPT and of the information in the invitation letter, and whether their perception is influenced by educational level. Design setting and participants: A questionnaire was sent out to men invited to OPT in 2020: 600 50-yr-old men in Region Västra Götaland and 1000 50-, 56-, and 62-yr-old men in Region Skåne. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Responses were evaluated on a Likert scale. The chi-square test was used to compare proportions. Results and limitations: A total of 534 men (34%) responded. Almost all considered the OPT concept as very good (84%) or good (13%). Among men not previously undergone a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test, a larger proportion with nonacademic (53%) than with academic education (41%) responded that the text about disadvantages was very clear (p = 0.03). A similar difference was observed for the text about advantages (68% vs 58%, p = 0.09). There was no association between education and searching for more information elsewhere. The low response rate is the main limitation. Conclusions: Almost all responding men evaluating the invitation letter for OPT were positive about making a personal decision regarding whether or not to have a PSA test. Most were content with the brief information. Men with academic education were somewhat less likely to find the information very clear. This shows a need for further research about how best to describe the advantages and disadvantages of prostate cancer testing. Patient summary: Almost all men who responded to a questionnaire to evaluate the invitation letter for organised prostate cancer testing were positive about the opportunity to make a personal decision regarding whether or not to have a prostate-specific antigen test.

Baseline Serum Prostate-specific Antigen Value Predicts the Risk of Subsequent Prostate Cancer Death-Results from the Norwegian Prostate Cancer Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels in midlife are strongly associated with the long-term risk of lethal prostate cancer in cohorts not subject to screening. This is the first study evaluating the association between PSA levels drawn as part of routine medical care in the Norwegian population and prostate cancer incidence and mortality. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between midlife PSA levels <4.0 ng/ml, drawn as part of routine medical care, and long-term risk of prostate cancer death. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Norwegian Prostate Cancer Consortium collected >8 million PSA results from >1 million Norwegian males ≥40 yr of age. We studied 176 099 men (predefined age strata: 40-54 and 55-69 yr) without a prior prostate cancer diagnosis who had a nonelevated baseline PSA level (<4.0 ng/ml) between January 1, 1995 and December 31, 2005. INTERVENTION: Baseline PSA. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We assessed the 16-yr risk of prostate cancer mortality. We calculated the discrimination (C-index) between predefined PSA strata (<0.5, 0.5-0.9, 1.0-1.9, 2.0-2.9, and 3.0-3.9 ng/ml) and subsequent prostate cancer death. Survival curves were plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median follow-up time of men who did not get prostate cancer was 17.9 yr. Overall, 84% of men had a baseline PSA level of <2.0 ng/ml and 1346 men died from prostate cancer, with 712 deaths (53%) occurring in the 16% of men with the highest baseline PSA of 2.0-3.9 ng/ml. Baseline PSA levels were associated with prostate cancer mortality (C-index 0.72 for both age groups, 40-54 and 55-69 yr). The fact that the reason for any given PSA measurement remains unknown represents a limitation. CONCLUSIONS: We replicated prior studies that baseline PSA at age 40-69 yr can be used to stratify a man's risk of dying from prostate cancer within the next 15-20 yr. PATIENT SUMMARY: A prostate-specific antigen level obtained as part of routine medical care is strongly associated with a man's risk of dying from prostate cancer in the next two decades.

2022 Update on Prostate Cancer Epidemiology and Risk Factors-A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common cancers worldwide. Understanding the epidemiology and risk factors of the disease is paramount to improve primary and secondary prevention strategies. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and summarize the current evidence on the descriptive epidemiology, large screening studies, diagnostic techniques, and risk factors of PCa. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PCa incidence and mortality rates for 2020 were obtained from the GLOBOCAN database of the International Agency for Research on Cancer. A systematic search was performed in July 2022 using PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE biomedical databases. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022359728). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Globally, PCa is the second most common cancer, with the highest incidence in North and South America, Europe, Australia, and the Caribbean. Risk factors include age, family history, and genetic predisposition. Additional factors may include smoking, diet, physical activity, specific medications, and occupational factors. As PCa screening has become more accepted, newer approaches such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and biomarkers have been implemented to identify patients who are likely to harbor significant tumors. Limitations of this review include the evidence being derived from meta-analyses of mostly retrospective studies. CONCLUSIONS: PCa remains the second most common cancer among men worldwide. PCa screening is gaining acceptance and will likely reduce PCa mortality at the cost of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Increasing use of MRI and biomarkers for the detection of PCa may mitigate some of the negative consequences of screening. PATIENT SUMMARY: Prostate cancer (PCa) remains the second most common cancer among men, and screening for PCa is likely to increase in the future. Improved diagnostic techniques can help reduce the number of men who need to be diagnosed and treated to save one life. Avoidable risk factors for PCa may include factors such as smoking, diet, physical activity, specific medications, and certain occupations.

Clinical Value of a Routine Urine Culture Prior to Transrectal Prostate Biopsy.

Background: Infectious complications after a transrectal prostate biopsy may be severe. In Sweden, a routine culture prior to all prostate biopsies was introduced to enable targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis and reduce postbiopsy infections. Objective: To investigate whether a clinical routine with a urine culture prior to a prostate biopsy and targeted prophylactic antibiotic therapy reduces postbiopsy infections. Design setting and participants: In 2015, a site-specific antimicrobial stewardship programme with a urine culture prior to a prostate biopsy was initiated in Region Kronoberg. To evaluate this routine, we designed a population-based register study including all men who had an outpatient prostate biopsy in 2015-2019 and a control period including all men who had a biopsy in 2010-2014, when a urinary culture was obtained only on clinical suspicion. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary outcome was infectious complications within 10 d and the secondary outcome was a change in antibiotic prophylactic treatment. An infectious complication was defined as prescription of antibiotics for urinary tract infections or admission to hospital for urinary tract infections or sepsis after a biopsy. Results and limitations: The urine culture period included 2971 prostate biopsy procedures, of which 2684 (90%) were preceded by a urine culture. The control period included 2818 procedures, of which 135 (4.8%) were preceded by a urine culture. Infectious complications were slightly more common during the urine culture period (5.0%) than during the control period (4.3%, p = 0.17), as was inpatient care for infections (3.5% vs 2.2%, p = 0.002). The routine identified 5.4% men with asymptomatic bacteriuria. Despite targeted antibiotic treatment (1.5% received a nonfluoroquinolone treatment), the rate of infectious complications (6.3%) was similar to that in the control period. Conclusions: Prebiopsy urine culture did not lead to fewer postbiopsy infections. Other measures are needed to reduce infectious complications after a prostate biopsy. Patient summary: In this report, we evaluated a routine with urine culture prior to a transrectal prostate biopsy and found that it did not lead to fewer infectious complications.