The dilemmas of prostate cancer screening

Hugosson, Jonas; Carlsson, Sigrid V

doi:10.5694/mja13.10905

Topics

In reply: We wish to make some comments in response to Haines’s point that the PIVOT (Prostate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial) failed to show any benefit from radical prostatectomy (RP) over surveillance.

1 Department of Urology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
2 Department of Surgery, Urology Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.

Correspondence: jonas@urol.se

Competing interests:

No relevant disclosures.

1. Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2012; 367: 203-213.
2. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 1708-1717.
3. Hugosson J, Carlsson S, Aus G, et al. Mortality results from the Göteborg randomised population-based prostate-cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 725-732.
4. Carlsson S, Vickers AJ, Roobol M, et al. Prostate cancer screening: facts, statistics, and interpretation in response to the US Preventive Services Task Force Review. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30: 2581-2584.
5. Wolters T, Roobol MJ, Steyerberg EW, et al. The effect of study arm on prostate cancer treatment in the large screening trial ERSPC. Int J Cancer 2010; 126: 2387-2393.
6. Heijnsdijk EA, Wever EM, Auvinen A, et al. Quality-of-life effects of prostate-specific antigen screening. N Engl J Med 2012; 367: 595-605.

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.