Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. In the US, 1 in 7 men will experience a prostate cancer diagnosis in his lifetime. Identifying ways to reduce the burden of prostate cancer is therefore a top research priority. Management of prostate cancer has changed dramatically since the advent and widespread dissemination of the PSA test. Since the early 1990s, prostate cancer mortality in the US has dropped by almost half. The CISNET Prostate Working Group (PWG) was formed to use disease modeling to explain these mortality trends. The CISNET PWG has developed three models of prostate cancer natural history, detection, and survival and calibrated them against US prostate cancer trends. Results indicate that both screening and treatment changes have reduced prostate cancer deaths. However, policies must be tailored to limit harms and costs associated with overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Different approaches for doing this have been proposed but cannot all be investigated in prospective studies. The objective of this application is to utilize and extend the CISNET PWG models to identify tailored and targeted intervention strategies that offer the most benefit while limiting harms and costs. We will determine whether we can improve screening further by using novel stratification approaches and also whether we can safely limit harms of overtreatment by judicious choices of primary and secondary therapies. These approaches will be applied in the US population and in international cancer control settings that may require modified strategies. We will provide decision makers with model access via online calculators with graphical user interfaces.
Our specific aims are:
Aim 1 : Identify active surveillance strategies that minimize patient burden without increasing risks of progression to non-curable disease or death.
Aim 2 : Develop stratified approaches to prostate cancer screening that target high-risk men based on polygenic risk and baseline PSA at age 45.
Aim 3 : Model secondary treatment strategies, their impact, and implications for population prostate cancer control.
Aim 4 : Determine whether racial disparities in prostate cancer mortality can be reduced by using stratified screening and treatment strategies.
Aim 5 : Modularize models to evaluate cancer control programs in non-US populations and collaborate with investigators in the UK and the Caribbean to develop policies for their populations and resources.
Aim 6 : Develop online calculators to support patient-physician decisions and policymaker deliberations about PSA screening and treatment for localized prostate cancer.
These aims are highly responsive to the funding opportunity announcement, addressing 6 of the 9 targeted priority areas. Our cumulative expertise in prostate modeling, our existing models, and our close ties with clinical experts who provide access to large, high-quality datasets for model validation and calibration position us well to uniquely contribute to the national and international dialogue about how best to address and control this most common cancer in men.

Public Health Relevance

The most effective ways to prevent, treat, and manage prostate cancer remain uncertain. Our team of investigators uses a unique inter-disciplinary approach for bringing together high-quality data from a wide range of sources and developing unified models of cancer progression to answer the most critical questions. In this application, we will examine efficiency gains of screening only high-risk individuals, benefits of avoiding or delaying treatment for low-risk cancers, and feasible approaches for reducing racial disparities. This work will advance the evidence necessary to make informed decisions about screening and treatment for this most common cancer in men.

National Institute of Health (NIH)
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Research Project--Cooperative Agreements (U01)
Project #
Application #
Study Section
Special Emphasis Panel (ZCA1)
Program Officer
Scott, Susan M
Project Start
Project End
Budget Start
Budget End
Support Year
Fiscal Year
Total Cost
Indirect Cost
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
United States
Zip Code
Shen, Jincheng; Wang, Lu; Daignault, Stephanie et al. (2018) Estimating the Optimal Personalized Treatment Strategy Based on Selected Variables to Prolong Survival via Random Survival Forest with Weighted Bootstrap. J Biopharm Stat 28:362-381
de Koning, Harry J; Gulati, Roman; Moss, Sue M et al. (2018) The efficacy of prostate-specific antigen screening: Impact of key components in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. Cancer 124:1197-1206
Carlsson, Sigrid V; Lilja, Hans (2018) Perspective on Prostate Cancer Screening. Clin Chem :
Ehdaie, Behfar; Carlsson, Sigrid (2018) Reply to 'Clinical utility of the Prostate Health Index (phi) for biopsy decision management in a large group urology practice setting'. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 21:446-447
Kohestani, Kimia; Chilov, Marina; Carlsson, Sigrid V (2018) Prostate cancer screening-when to start and how to screen? Transl Androl Urol 7:34-45
Inoue, Lurdes Y T; Lin, Daniel W; Newcomb, Lisa F et al. (2018) Comparative Analysis of Biopsy Upgrading in Four Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Cohorts. Ann Intern Med 168:1-9
Kinsella, Netty; Stattin, Pär; Cahill, Declan et al. (2018) Factors Influencing Men's Choice of and Adherence to Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: A Mixed-method Systematic Review. Eur Urol 74:261-280
Kinsella, Netty; Helleman, Jozien; Bruinsma, Sophie et al. (2018) Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of contemporary worldwide practices. Transl Androl Urol 7:83-97
Roobol, Monique J; Carlsson, Sigrid V (2018) The ERSPC Study: Quality Takes Time and Perseverance. Clin Chem :
Kaur, Dhamanpreet; Ulloa-Pérez, Ernesto; Gulati, Roman et al. (2018) Racial disparities in prostate cancer survival in a screened population: Reality versus artifact. Cancer 124:1752-1759

Showing the most recent 10 out of 26 publications