Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Oct;26(10):956-970.
doi: 10.1111/iju.14039. Epub 2019 Jun 10.

Screening for prostate cancer: History, evidence, controversies and future perspectives toward individualized screening

Affiliations

Screening for prostate cancer: History, evidence, controversies and future perspectives toward individualized screening

Kazuto Ito et al. Int J Urol. 2019 Oct.

Abstract

Differences in the incidence and mortality rate of prostate cancer between the USA and Japan have been decreasing over time, and were only twofold in 2017. Therefore, countermeasures against prostate cancer could be very important not only in Western countries, but also in developed Asian countries. Screening for prostate cancer in the general population using transrectal ultrasonography, digital rectal examination and/or prostate acid phosphatase began in Japan in the early 1980s, and screening with prostate-specific antigen and digital rectal examination has been widespread in the USA since the late 1980s. Large- and mid-scale randomized controlled trials on screening for prostate cancer began around 1990 in the USA, Canada and Europe. However, most of these studies failed as randomized controlled trials because of high contamination in the control arm, low compliance in the screening arm or insufficient screening setting about screening frequency and/or biopsy indication. The best available level 1 evidence is data from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer and the Göteborg screening study. However, several non-urological organizations and lay media around the world have mischaracterized the efficacy of prostate-specific antigen screening. To avoid long-term confusion about screening for prostate cancer, leading professional urological organizations, including the Japanese Urological Association, are moving toward the establishment of an optimal screening system that minimizes the drawbacks of overdetection, overtreatment and loss of quality of life due to treatment, and maximizes reductions in the risk of death as a result of prostate cancer and the development of metastatic prostate cancer.

Keywords: guidelines; prostate cancer; prostate-specific antigen; screening; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Parkin DM, Whelan SL, Ferlar J et al. Cancer incidence in five continents vol. I to VIII: international comparison of age-standardized incidence rates for prostate cancer in selected registries, males, 1993-1996. IARC Cancer Base No. 7, Lyon, 2005.
    1. Ito K. Prostate cancer in Asian men. Nat. Rev. Urol. 2014; 11: 197-212.
    1. Silverberg E, Grant RN. Cancer statistics, 1970. CA Cancer J. Clin. 1970; 20: 11-23.
    1. Silverberg E, Holleb AI. Cancer statistics, 1971. CA Cancer J. Clin. 1971; 21: 13-31.
    1. Silverberg E, Holleb AI. Cancer statistics 1972. CA Cancer J. Clin. 1972; 22: 2-20.

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources