Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique logoLink to Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique
. 2007 May 1;98(3):212–216. [Article in French] doi: 10.1007/BF03403715

Le dépistage du cancer de la prostate : hétérogénéités des recommandations

Une exception française ?

Maxime Gignon 1, Alain Braillon 1, François-Xavier Chaine 1, Gérard Dubois 1,✉
PMCID: PMC6975731  PMID: 17626387

Abstract

Background

At present, clinical practice guidelines for prostate cancer screening are controversial in France. The French National Agency for Health Care Quality does not recommend screening for prostate cancer. In contrast, since 2002 the French Urological Association has been supporting screening. However, both support selected screening for men with risk factors, despite there having been no assessment to date of whether the screening is justified. In 2002, Prostatic Specific Antigen prescriptions increased by 22% over one year and PSA was the first prescription for cancer markers. The history of the pros and cons for prostate cancer screening is summarized. Prostate cancer does not qualify under the World Health Organization’s criteria for screening.

Conclusion

At the present time, prostate cancer mass screening cannot be recommended. Pitfalls for Clinical Guidelines enforcement are discussed.

MeSH terms: Screening, cancer, prostate, clinical guidelines, public health

Références

  • 1.Wilson JM, Jungner YG. Principles and practice of mass screening for disease. Bol Oficina Sanit Panam. 1968;65:281–393. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Soulie M, Villers A, Grosclaude P, Menegoz F, Schaffer P, Mace-Lesec’h J, et al. Cancer of the prostate in France: Results of the survey CCAFU-FRANCIM. Prog Urol. 2001;11:478–85. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Ménégoz F, Chérié-Challine L. Le cancer en France: incidence et mortalité. Situation en 1995, évolution entre 1975 et 1995. Paris: La Documentation Française; 1998. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Agence nationale d’accréditation et d’évaluation en santé. Opportunité d’un dépistage systématique du cancer de la prostate par le dosage de l’antigène spécifique de la prostate. Paris: Anaes; 1999. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Bauvin E, Remontet L, Grosclaude P. Incidence and mortality of prostate cancer in France: Trends between 1978 and 2000. Prog Urol. 2003;13:1334–39. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Rebillard X, Tretarre B, Villers A. L’épidémiologie du cancer de la prostate. Rev Prat. 2003;53:2224–28. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Sant M, Aareleid T, Berrino F, Bielska L M, Carli PM, Faivre J, et al. EUROCARE-3: Survival of cancer patients diagnosed 1990–94 — Results and commentary. Ann Oncol. 2003;14(Suppl5):v61–118. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdg754. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Soulie M, Villers A, Richaud P, Prapotnich D, Ruffion A, Grosclaude P. Competitive morbidity and its impact on life expectancy: Evaluation and inclusion in the therapeutic decision regarding localized prostatic cancer. Prog Urol. 2001;11:1195–204. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.La mortalité prématurée par cancer. Une spécificité française? BEH 2003 n°30–31 Institut de veille sanitaire.
  • 10.Chirpaz E, Colonna M, Menegoz F, Grosclaude P, Schaffer P, Arveux P, et al. Incidence and mortality trends for prostate cancer in 5 French areas from 1982 to 1996. Int J Cancer. 2002;97:372–76. doi: 10.1002/ijc.1603. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, Haggman M, Andersson SO, Bratell S, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:1977–84. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa043739. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Dubois G. Tests de dépistage: application aux cancers. Le Concours Médical. 1989;11:3167–68. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Van der Cruijsen-Koeter IW, Vis AN, Roobol MJ, Wildhagen MF, de Koning HJ, van der Kwast TH, et al. Comparison of screen detected and clinically diagnosed prostate cancer in the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer, section Rotterdam. J Urol. 2005;174:121–25. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000162061.40533.0f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Screening for prostate cancer: Recommendationrationale. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:915–16. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-137-11-200212030-00013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Ancelle-Park R, Sancho-Garnier H, Faivre J. Le dépistage du cancer. Recommandations pour l’Union européenne. Actualité et dossier en Santé Publique. 2001;34:72–77. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Rapport au Ministre de la Santé par la Commission d’orientation sur le cancer. Paris: Direction Générale de la Santé, 2003.
  • 17.Rebillard X, Villers A, Ruffion A, et al. Prog Urol. 2002. Cancer de la prostate; pp. 29–67. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Greenlee RT, Hill-Harmon MB, Murray T, Thun M. Cancer statistics, 2001. CA Cancer J Clin. 2001;51:15–36. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.51.1.15. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Horninger W, Berger A, Pelzer A, Klocker H, Oberaigner W, Schonitzer D, et al. Screening for prostate cancer: Updated experience from the Tyrol study. Can J Urol. 2005;12(s1):7–13. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Agence nationale d’accréditation et d’évaluation en santé et Association Française d’Urologie. Recommandation pour la pratique clinique: éléments d’information des hommes envisageant la réalisation d’un dépistage individuel du cancer de la prostate. Paris: Anaes; 2004. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Bourel M, Ardaillou R. Sur le dépistage du cancer de la prostate par le dosage de l’antigène spécifique de la prostate (APS) dans le plasma. Bull Acad Natle Méd. 2003;187:985–95. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Bruyere F, Traxer O. Congress of the Association Française d’Urologie (AFU) 2004: prostate cancer management. Ann Urol. 2005;39(sl1):S1–15. doi: 10.1016/S0003-4401(05)80001-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Ito K, Yamamoto T, Ohi M, Takechi H, Kurokawa K, Suzuki K, et al. Possibility of rescreening intervals of more than one year in men with APS levels of 4.0 ng/ml or less. Prostate. 2003;57:8–13. doi: 10.1002/pros.10268. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.CNAMTS. Les actes de biologies remboursés en 2001 et 2002 par le Régime Général d’assurance Maladie — Hors Sections Locales Mutualistes. Paris: CNAMTS-BIOLAM; 2004. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.de Discours M. Jacques Chirac, Président de la République sur la lutte contre le cancer. 2006. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Dubois G. L’absence de dépistage efficace du cancer colorectal en France est irrationnelle, volontaire et inexcusable. Oncologie. 1999;1:276–80. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Lacasse Y, Ferreira I, Brooks D, Newman T, Goldstein RS. Critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines targeting chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:69–74. doi: 10.1001/archinte.161.1.69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Lohr KN, Field MJ. A provisional instrument for assessing clinical practice guidelines. In: Field MJ, Lohr KN, editors. Guidelines for Clinical Practice. From Development to Use. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1992. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Hayward RSA, Wilson MC, Tunis SR, Bass EB, Guyatt G f t E-B M W Group. Users’ guides to the Medical Literature. VIII. How to Use Clinical Practice Guidelines. A. Are the Recommendations Valid? JAMA. 1995;274:570–74. doi: 10.1001/jama.1995.03530070068032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Pierson DJ. Clinical practice guidelines for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A review and comparison of current resources. Clinical practice guidelines for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A review and comparison of current resources. Respir Care. 2006;51:277–88. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Burgers JS, Bailey JV, Klazinga NS, Van Der Bij AK, Grol R, Feder G. AGREE COLLABORATION. Inside guidelines: Comparative analysis of recommendations and evidence in diabetes guidelines from 13 countries. Diabetes Care. 2002;25:1933–39. doi: 10.2337/diacare.25.11.1933. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Burgers JS, Fervers B, Haugh M, Brouwers M, Browman G, Philip T, Cluzeau FA. International assessment of the quality of clinical practice guidelines in oncology using the Appraisal of Guidelines and Research and Evaluation Instrument. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:2000–7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.06.157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Coley CM, Barry MJ, Fleming C, Mulley AG. Early detection of prostate cancer. Part I: Prior probability and effectiveness of tests. The American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126:394–406. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-126-5-199703010-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Collège des Médecins du Québec. Dépistage du cancer de la prostate: utilisation de l’APS. Québec: Collège des Médecins du Québec; 1998. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Ferrini R, Woolf SH. American College of Preventive Medicine practice policy. Screening for prostate cancer in American men. Am J Prev Med. 1998;15:81–84. doi: 10.1016/S0749-3797(98)00050-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Guidelines for use of PSA and screening prostate cancer. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Medical Association, 1999.
  • 37.Schersten T, Baile MA, Asua J, Jonsson E. Prostate cancer screening: Evidence synthesis and update (INAHTA Joint Project). Basque Office for Health Technology Assessment, Health Departement Basque Government (Osteba) 1999. [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Société scientifique de médecine générale. L’antigène prostatique spécifique (P.S.A). Recommandation de bonne pratique. Paris: SSMG; 2000. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Recommendations on cancer screening in the European Union. Advisory Committee on Cancer Prevention. Eur J Cancer. 2000;36:1473–78. doi: 10.1016/S0959-8049(00)00122-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Ministry of Health, National Medical Research Council, National Committee on Cancer Care. Prostate cancer. Clinical practice guidelines. Singapore: MOH; 2000. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Prostate-specific antigen PSA best practice policy. American Urological Association (AUA). Oncology (Williston Park) 2000;14:267–72. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Slaughter PM, Pinfold SP, Laupacis A. Prostatespecific Antigen (PSA) screening in asymptomatic men. Toronto, ON: ICES; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Smith RA, von Eschenbach AC, Wender R, Levin B, Byers T, Rothenberger D, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer: Update of early detection guidelines for prostate, colorectal, and endometrial cancers. Also: update 2001-testing for early lung cancer detection. CA Cancer J Clin. 2001;51:38–75. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.51.1.38. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Should mass screening for prostate cancer be introduced at the national level? WHO Regional Office for Europe’s Health Evidence Network (HEN), 2004.
  • 45.Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Eyre HJ. American Cancer Society Guidelines for the Early Detection of Cancer, 2005. CA Cancer J Clin. 2005;55:31–44. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.55.1.31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES