Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2007;335:1105-1106 (1 December), doi:10.1136/bmj.39385.491424.80 (published 15 November 2007)
Clinicians should promote informed decision making while awaiting definitive evidence from RCTs
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Current policies on screening for prostate cancer vary worldwide. This discrepancy can be explained in part by the lack of clear evidence to support or refute such screening. Evidence is lacking for the diagnostic accuracy of current screening tests (digital rectal examination and prostate specific antigen testing) and whether screening ultimately improves survival and quality of life.1 In their study in this week's BMJ, Lane and colleagues present results from the prostate testing for cancer and treatment study, which assesses the feasibility of testing for prostate cancer in younger men (45-49 years).2
A recent systematic review1 identified two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of screening for prostate cancer.3 4 Both trials had several methodological weaknesses. Reanalysis of these trials using an intention to treat analysis showed no significant reduction in mortality between men randomised to screening and men in control groups (relative risk 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.76
Dragan Ilic, senior lecturer, Sally Green, professor
Monash Institute of Health Services Research, Monash University, Locked Bag 29, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton VIC 3168, Australia
dragan.ilic@med.monash.edu.au
Read all Rapid Responses
UK medical students have published unreleased government plans to restrict failed asylum seekers' access to medical care