Trends in prostate cancer incidence and mortality: an analysis of mortality change by screening intensity.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The rate of death from prostate cancer has recently declined in many areas of the world. Over the past 15 years prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening has increased in popularity, which has resulted in increases in the incidence of prostate cancer. Over the same period there have been changes in the management of the disease and, in particular, the use of androgen ablation. We set out to examine the relation between changes in prostate cancer incidence (a surrogate for PSA screening) and subsequent changes in mortality in regions using common treatment recommendations. METHODS: We used data from prostate cancer cases and deaths reported to the British Columbia Cancer Registry during 1985-1999 to examine trends in incidence and mortality in 88 small health areas (SHAs) among men aged 50-74 years. We conducted 2 analyses. In the first we classified the SHAs by intensity of PSA screening (low, medium or high) according to their ranked age-standardized incidence rate of prostate cancer in 1990-1994 and examined subsequent trends in prostate cancer mortality. In the second analysis we examined the SHA-specific relative change in prostate cancer incidence between 1985-1989 and 1990-1994 and correlated it with the relative change in mortality for cases diagnosed after 1990. RESULTS: Between 1985-1989 and 1990-1994 the incidence of prostate cancer increased by 53.2% and 14.6% among men aged 50-74 and those 75 and over respectively. Between 1985-1989 and 1995-1999 prostate cancer mortality declined by 17.6% and 7.9% in the 2 age groups respectively. Among men aged 50-74 years SHAs with low, middle and high levels of screening had respective increases in prostate cancer incidence of 5.4%, 53.6% and 70.5% between 1985-1989 and 1990-1994. Corresponding decreases in mortality between 1985-1989 and 1995-1999 were 28.9%, 18.0% and 13.5%. Mortality declines were greatest in SHAs with low screening levels (p = 0.032). Before 1990 prostate cancer mortality was similar in the 3 screening groups (p = 0.72). Regions with the smallest increases in incidence had the largest declines in mortality. INTERPRETATION: We found no association between the intensity of PSA screening and subsequent decreases in prostate cancer mortality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".