A Randomized Trial of Early Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer (ProScreen) (ProScreen)

Prostate Cancer Screening Trial

A population-based randomised trial of prostate cancer screening will be carried out. A total of approximately 117,200 men aged 50-63 in Helsinki and Tampere are randomised to intervention (screening) or control arm. A reduction in harms of screening in the form of overdiagnosis is sought, while retaining as much as possible of the mortality benefit (reduction in prostate cancer mortality). Novel methods that have been shown to increase specificity for clinically relevant prostate cancer but never tested in a randomised setting will be employed in screening and diagnostics. The main end-point is prostate cancer mortality at 10 and 15 years of follow-up.

Study Overview

• Status: Enrolling by invitation
• Conditions: Prostate Cancer
• Intervention / Treatment: Diagnostic test: Prostate cancer screening

Detailed Description

Frequent adverse effects have so far tipped the balance of benefits and harms against prostate cancer screening, and therefore the investigators will focus on employing the best possible means for reducing them. The project introduces a novel concept for PC screening that minimises overdiagnosis and overtreatment, while retaining the mortality benefit to shift the balance of screening benefits and harms to a favourable net effect. The strategy for implementation as a randomised screening trial utilises three levels of risk assessment (PSA, kallikrein panel and MRI) before the diagnostic procedure (prostate biopsy), each aimed at eliminating detection of indolent disease. The study hypothesis is that by virtue of the novel three-tiered screening algorithm, the beneficial screening effect (prostate cancer mortality reduction) can be retained, while the overdiagnosis can be largely eliminated. The impact of an integrative approach has never been evaluated - each of the methods has only been assessed in isolation. The breakthrough potential of the proposal lies in combining the three novel approaches and taking them to the forefront of applied research through a randomised trial. The key impact of the study is in defining whether the overall balance of benefits and harms of prostate cancer screening can be reversed by applying the best possible methods to detect only clinically important disease. If the study hypothesis is affirmed, it opens the way to introduction of prostate cancer screening. If the balance of harms and benefits is still unfavourable, the problem of overdiagnosis in prostate cancer may be intractable.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Anticipated): 17400
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• Finland
  • Helsinki, Finland
    • Helsinki University and Helsinki University Hospital
  • Tampere, Finland
    • University of Tampere

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 50 years to 63 years (Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No
• Genders Eligible for Study: Male

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• 50-63-year-old men (age in 2018) residing in Tampere or Helsinki

Exclusion Criteria:

• Prevalent prostate cancer

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Screening
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: None (Open Label)

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Screening arm; Invitation to prostate cancer screening and questionnaires.	Diagnostic test: Prostate cancer screening; Depending on each diagnostic test result the participants in the screening arm will undergo PSA-testing, 4Kscore determination, MRI, and MRI/US fusion biopsy only.
No Intervention: Control arm; Registry-based follow-up and a questionnaire.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Prostate cancer (PrCa) mortality	An intention to screen analysis will be performed, with all men in the groups defined by random allocation, regardless of compliance. Follow-up starts at randomisation, and ends at death. Cox regression will be used with prostate cancer death as the outcome.	At 10 years of follow-up.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Prostate cancer (PrCa) mortality - secondary analysis	A secondary analysis of prostate cancer mortality will be performed using the Cuzick method with correction for contamination and selection bias due to non-compliance.	At 10 years of follow-up.
Cumulative incidence of advanced (T3-T4 or M1) prostate cancer	Intermediate outcomes include cumulative incidence of advanced (T3-T4 or M1) prostate cancer (number of cases relative to population size, not using incidence density to avoid the lead-time bias due to early detection by screening).	At approximately 5 years of follow-up.
Cumulative incidence of low-risk cancer (Gleason<7)	Intermediate outcomes include cumulative incidence of low-risk cancer (Gleason<7) as an indicator of overdiagnosis.	At approximately 5 years of follow-up.

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Analysis of screening test performance - 4Kscore	Diagnostic performance of 4Kscore among men with PSA>3 in terms of predictive values, sensitivity, and specificity for clinically significant PrCa (defined as Gleason 7+ cancers - including those diagnosed within the next four years for test-negative non-biopsied men i.e. false negatives).	At 2, 4, and 6 years.
Analysis of screening test performance - MRI	Diagnostic performance of MRI based on PI-RADS v2 scores among men with PSA>3 and positive 4Kscore in terms of predictive values, sensitivity, and specificity for clinically significant PrCa (defined as Gleason 7+ cancers - including those diagnosed within the next four years for test-negative non-biopsied men i.e. false negatives).	At 2, 4, and 6 years.
Assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer	Health-related quality of life among men diagnosed with prostate cancer will be assessed using the EPIC 26 instrument enrolling screen-detected and interval cases, as well as those diagnosed among non-participants and in the control arm.	At 4 years.
Assessment of short-term prostate cancer (PrCa)-specific anxiety	Anxiety among men diagnosed with prostate cancer will be assessed using the Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer (MAX-PC), enrolling screen-detected and interval cases, as well as those diagnosed among non-participants and in the control arm.	At 4 years.
Adverse effects of prostate biopsy immediately after the biopsy	Adverse effects of biopsy are evaluated using a questionnaire on complications including assessment of bleeding, lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), erectile dysfunction (ED), pain, and antibiotic treatment immediately after the biopsy.	During the first year.
Adverse effects of prostate biopsy 30 days after the biopsy	Adverse effects of biopsy are evaluated with a questionnaire on complications, including assessment of bleeding, lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), erectile dysfunction (ED), pain, and antibiotic treatment 30 days after the biopsy.	During the first year.
Cost analysis (incremental cost effectiveness ratio)	Economic evaluation will commence with cost analysis, and the final analysis of incremental cost effectiveness ratio (with a decision analysis) will be conducted once data on both long-term cost and real outcome data on both utilities (quality-adjusted life-years) and mortality are available.	At 5 (cost analysis) and 10-15 (final analysis) years of follow-up.

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Tampere University
• Collaborators: Lund University; University of Helsinki; Hospital District of Helsinki and Uusimaa; Helsinki University Hospital, Finland; Tampere University Hospital, Finland; Finnish Cancer Registry, Finland; University of Turku, Finland; Fimlab Laboratories, Finland; Laboratory HUSLAB, Finland; Clinical Research Institute HUCH Ltd, Finland
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Anssi Auvinen, MD, PhD, Tampere University

Publications and helpful links

Helpful Links

• Website of the study.

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): April 23, 2018
• Primary Completion (Anticipated): December 31, 2032
• Study Completion (Anticipated): December 31, 2032

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: January 15, 2018
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: January 30, 2018
• First Posted (Actual): February 6, 2018

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Estimate): December 9, 2022
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: December 6, 2022
• Last Verified: December 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: Magnetic resonance imaging; Prostate cancer; Screening; Prostate-specific antigen; Randomised trial; Kallikrein
• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Neoplasms; Urogenital Neoplasms; Neoplasms by Site; Genital Neoplasms, Male; Prostatic Diseases; Prostatic Neoplasms
• Other Study ID Numbers: 2910/2017

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: Yes
• IPD Plan Description: The data will be managed and made openly available with Finnish Social Science Data Archive (FSD) and publisher websites. The type of data includes numerical data, mainly counts, and continuous variables classified as categorical. The data will be uploaded in tabular form (as a data matrix). The data will be deidentified and supplied only as frequencies. The released data will be available under CC license for research purposes (accessible for registered users of FSD database). Citation of the original research is needed whenever used by third parties.
• IPD Sharing Time Frame: The data wil be released after publication of the results (approximately 2032-).
• IPD Sharing Access Criteria: CC license, FSD database registered users
• IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type: Study Protocol; Informed Consent Form (ICF)

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No