Values and preferences of men for undergoing prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer: a systematic review

Robin W M Vernooij, Lyubov Lytvyn, Hector Pardo-Hernandez, Loai Albarqouni, Carlos Canelo-Aybar, Karen Campbell, Thomas Agoritsas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)
39 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate men's values and preferences regarding prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer.

DESIGN: Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and grey literature up to 2 September 2017.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Primary studies of men's values and preferences regarding the benefits and harms of PSA screening.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias with a modified version of a risk of bias tool for values and preferences studies, the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument V.3 and the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool.

RESULTS: We identified 4172 unique citations, of which 11 studies proved eligible. Five studies investigated PSA screening using a direct choice study design, whereas six used decisions aids displaying patient-important outcomes. The direct choice studies used different methodologies and varied considerably in the reporting of outcomes. Two studies suggested that men were willing to forego screening with a small benefit in prostate cancer mortality if it would decrease the likelihood of unnecessary treatment or biopsies. In contrast, one study reported that men were willing to accept a substantial overdiagnosis to reduce their risk of prostate cancer mortality. Among the six studies involving decision aids, willingness to undergo screening varied substantially from 37% when displaying a hypothetical reduction in mortality of 10 per 1000 men, to 44% when displaying a reduction in mortality of 7 per 1000. We found no studies that specifically investigated whether values and preferences differed among men with family history, of African descent or with lower socioeconomic levels.

CONCLUSION: The variability of men's values and preferences reflect that the decision to screen is highly preference sensitive. Our review highlights the need for shared decision making in men considering prostate cancer screening.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018095585.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)e025470
JournalBMJ Open
Volume8
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 5 Sep 2018

Fingerprint

Prostate-Specific Antigen
Prostatic Neoplasms
Decision Support Techniques
Mortality
Literature
Early Detection of Cancer
MEDLINE
Decision Making
Biopsy

Cite this

Vernooij, R. W. M., Lytvyn, L., Pardo-Hernandez, H., Albarqouni, L., Canelo-Aybar, C., Campbell, K., & Agoritsas, T. (2018). Values and preferences of men for undergoing prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer: a systematic review. BMJ Open, 8(9), e025470. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025470
Vernooij, Robin W M ; Lytvyn, Lyubov ; Pardo-Hernandez, Hector ; Albarqouni, Loai ; Canelo-Aybar, Carlos ; Campbell, Karen ; Agoritsas, Thomas. / Values and preferences of men for undergoing prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer: a systematic review. In: BMJ Open. 2018 ; Vol. 8, No. 9. pp. e025470.
@article{60113819323b43f796f553a450c487ea,
title = "Values and preferences of men for undergoing prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer: a systematic review",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: To investigate men's values and preferences regarding prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer.DESIGN: Systematic review.DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and grey literature up to 2 September 2017.ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Primary studies of men's values and preferences regarding the benefits and harms of PSA screening.DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias with a modified version of a risk of bias tool for values and preferences studies, the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument V.3 and the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool.RESULTS: We identified 4172 unique citations, of which 11 studies proved eligible. Five studies investigated PSA screening using a direct choice study design, whereas six used decisions aids displaying patient-important outcomes. The direct choice studies used different methodologies and varied considerably in the reporting of outcomes. Two studies suggested that men were willing to forego screening with a small benefit in prostate cancer mortality if it would decrease the likelihood of unnecessary treatment or biopsies. In contrast, one study reported that men were willing to accept a substantial overdiagnosis to reduce their risk of prostate cancer mortality. Among the six studies involving decision aids, willingness to undergo screening varied substantially from 37{\%} when displaying a hypothetical reduction in mortality of 10 per 1000 men, to 44{\%} when displaying a reduction in mortality of 7 per 1000. We found no studies that specifically investigated whether values and preferences differed among men with family history, of African descent or with lower socioeconomic levels.CONCLUSION: The variability of men's values and preferences reflect that the decision to screen is highly preference sensitive. Our review highlights the need for shared decision making in men considering prostate cancer screening.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018095585.",
author = "Vernooij, {Robin W M} and Lyubov Lytvyn and Hector Pardo-Hernandez and Loai Albarqouni and Carlos Canelo-Aybar and Karen Campbell and Thomas Agoritsas",
note = "{\circledC} Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
day = "5",
doi = "10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025470",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "e025470",
journal = "BMJ Open",
issn = "2044-6055",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "9",

}

Vernooij, RWM, Lytvyn, L, Pardo-Hernandez, H, Albarqouni, L, Canelo-Aybar, C, Campbell, K & Agoritsas, T 2018, 'Values and preferences of men for undergoing prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer: a systematic review' BMJ Open, vol. 8, no. 9, pp. e025470. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025470

Values and preferences of men for undergoing prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer: a systematic review. / Vernooij, Robin W M; Lytvyn, Lyubov; Pardo-Hernandez, Hector; Albarqouni, Loai; Canelo-Aybar, Carlos; Campbell, Karen; Agoritsas, Thomas.

In: BMJ Open, Vol. 8, No. 9, 05.09.2018, p. e025470.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Values and preferences of men for undergoing prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer: a systematic review

AU - Vernooij, Robin W M

AU - Lytvyn, Lyubov

AU - Pardo-Hernandez, Hector

AU - Albarqouni, Loai

AU - Canelo-Aybar, Carlos

AU - Campbell, Karen

AU - Agoritsas, Thomas

N1 - © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

PY - 2018/9/5

Y1 - 2018/9/5

N2 - OBJECTIVES: To investigate men's values and preferences regarding prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer.DESIGN: Systematic review.DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and grey literature up to 2 September 2017.ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Primary studies of men's values and preferences regarding the benefits and harms of PSA screening.DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias with a modified version of a risk of bias tool for values and preferences studies, the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument V.3 and the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool.RESULTS: We identified 4172 unique citations, of which 11 studies proved eligible. Five studies investigated PSA screening using a direct choice study design, whereas six used decisions aids displaying patient-important outcomes. The direct choice studies used different methodologies and varied considerably in the reporting of outcomes. Two studies suggested that men were willing to forego screening with a small benefit in prostate cancer mortality if it would decrease the likelihood of unnecessary treatment or biopsies. In contrast, one study reported that men were willing to accept a substantial overdiagnosis to reduce their risk of prostate cancer mortality. Among the six studies involving decision aids, willingness to undergo screening varied substantially from 37% when displaying a hypothetical reduction in mortality of 10 per 1000 men, to 44% when displaying a reduction in mortality of 7 per 1000. We found no studies that specifically investigated whether values and preferences differed among men with family history, of African descent or with lower socioeconomic levels.CONCLUSION: The variability of men's values and preferences reflect that the decision to screen is highly preference sensitive. Our review highlights the need for shared decision making in men considering prostate cancer screening.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018095585.

AB - OBJECTIVES: To investigate men's values and preferences regarding prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer.DESIGN: Systematic review.DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and grey literature up to 2 September 2017.ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Primary studies of men's values and preferences regarding the benefits and harms of PSA screening.DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias with a modified version of a risk of bias tool for values and preferences studies, the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument V.3 and the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool.RESULTS: We identified 4172 unique citations, of which 11 studies proved eligible. Five studies investigated PSA screening using a direct choice study design, whereas six used decisions aids displaying patient-important outcomes. The direct choice studies used different methodologies and varied considerably in the reporting of outcomes. Two studies suggested that men were willing to forego screening with a small benefit in prostate cancer mortality if it would decrease the likelihood of unnecessary treatment or biopsies. In contrast, one study reported that men were willing to accept a substantial overdiagnosis to reduce their risk of prostate cancer mortality. Among the six studies involving decision aids, willingness to undergo screening varied substantially from 37% when displaying a hypothetical reduction in mortality of 10 per 1000 men, to 44% when displaying a reduction in mortality of 7 per 1000. We found no studies that specifically investigated whether values and preferences differed among men with family history, of African descent or with lower socioeconomic levels.CONCLUSION: The variability of men's values and preferences reflect that the decision to screen is highly preference sensitive. Our review highlights the need for shared decision making in men considering prostate cancer screening.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018095585.

U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025470

DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025470

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - e025470

JO - BMJ Open

JF - BMJ Open

SN - 2044-6055

IS - 9

ER -