Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Individual and Mass Screening

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Management of Prostate Cancer

  • 949 Accesses

Abstract

Screening for prostate cancer is one of the main current health issues nowadays. As prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer affecting over 10% of men in the Western world, early detection by mass screening or by individual approaches has to be considered in order to reduce disease-specific morbidity and mortality. Randomized studies on population-based screening show a significant specific mortality reduction of 30%, but current screening protocols are unacceptable and need adjustment in order to reduce unnecessary biopsy procedures and overdiagnosis of low-risk cancers. The incidence of interval cancers has to be lowered, and screening intervals need to be individualized. Quality of life appears to be improved for those that are diagnosed with intermediate and high-risk cancers. Individual screening can be performed based on adequate information upfront, followed by the application of validated risk calculators including especially the level of serum markers, digital rectal examination, and prostate volume. A strong need for the development of prognostic tools remains.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Albertsen PC, Moore DF et al (2011) Impact of comorbidity on survival among men with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 29(10):1335–1341

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Andermann A, Blancquaert I, Beauchamp S et al (2008) Revisiting Wilson and Jungner in the genomic age: a review of screening criteria over the past 40 years. Bull World Health Organ. 86(4):317–319.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Andriole GL, Levin DL et al (2005) Prostate cancer screening in the prostate, lung, colorectal and ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial: findings from the initial screening round of a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 97(6):433–438

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Andriole GL, Crawford ED et al (2009a) Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. N Engl J Med 360(13):1310–1319

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Andriole GL, Grubb RL 3rd et al (2009b) Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. N Engl J Med 360:1310–1319

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ankerst DP, Groskopf J et al (2008) Predicting prostate cancer risk through incorporation of prostate cancer gene 3. J Urol 180(4):1303–1308; discussion 1308

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bangma CH, van Schaik RH et al (2010) On the use of prostate-specific antigen for screening of prostate cancer in European randomised study for screening of prostate cancer. Eur J Cancer 46(17):3109–3119

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Benson MC, Whang IS et al (1992a) The use of prostate specific antigen density to enhance the predictive value of intermediate levels of serum prostate specific antigen. J Urol 147(3 Pt 2):817–821

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Benson MC, Whang IS et al (1992b) Prostate specific antigen density: a means of distinguishing benign prostatic hypertrophy and prostate cancer. J Urol 147(3 Pt 2):815–816

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Berenguer A, Lujan M et al (2003) The Spanish contribution to the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer. BJU Int 92(suppl 2):33–38

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boevee SJ, Venderbos LD et al (2010) Change of tumour characteristics and treatment over time in both arms of the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer. Eur J Cancer 46(17):3082–3089

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Borden LS Jr, Wright JL et al (2007) An abnormal digital rectal examination is an independent predictor of Gleason > or =7 prostate cancer in men undergoing initial prostate biopsy: a prospective study of 790 men. BJU Int 99(3):559–563

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman CB, Carver BS et al (2005) Prostate cancer in patients with an abnormal digital rectal examination and serum prostate-specific antigen less than 4.0 ng/mL. Urology 66(4):803–807

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bray F, Lortet-Tieulent J et al (2010) Prostate cancer incidence and mortality trends in 37 European countries: an overview. Eur J Cancer 46(17):3040–3052

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bruner DW, Moore D et al (2003) Relative risk of prostate cancer for men with affected relatives: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cancer 107(5):797–803

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cavadas V, Osorio L et al (2010) Prostate cancer prevention trial and European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer risk calculators: a performance comparison in a contemporary screened cohort. Eur Urol 58(4):551–558

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Charlson M, Szatrowski TP et al (1994) Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol 47(11):1245–1251

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chun FK, de la Taille A et al (2009) Prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3): development and internal validation of a novel biopsy nomogram. Eur Urol 56(4):659–667

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ciatto S, Gervasi G et al (2003a) Specific features of the Italian section of the ERSPC. BJU Int 92(suppl 2):30–32

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ciatto S, Zappa M et al (2003b) Contamination by opportunistic screening in the European randomized study of prostate cancer screening. BJU Int 92(suppl 2):97–100

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Collin SM, Martin RM et al (2008) Prostate-cancer mortality in the USA and UK in 1975–2004: an ecological study. Lancet Oncol 9(5):445–452

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cooperberg MR (2008) Prostate cancer risk assessment: choosing the sharpest tool in the shed. Cancer 113(11):3062–3066

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford ED, DeAntoni EP et al (1996) Serum prostate-specific antigen and digital rectal examination for early detection of prostate cancer in a national community-based program. The Prostate Cancer Education Council. Urology 47(6):863–869

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon H, Scully M et al (2009) The prostate cancer screening debate: public reaction to medical controversy in the media. Public Underst Sci 18(1):115–128

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Djavan B, Margreiter M (2007) Biopsy standards for detection of prostate cancer. World J Urol 25(1):11–17

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein JI, Walsh PC et al (1994) Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA 271(5):368–374

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Eskew LA, Bare RL et al (1997) Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 157(1):199–202; discussion 202–193

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ferlay J, Shin HR et al (2010) GLOBOCAN 2008, cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 10 [Internet]

    Google Scholar 

  • Ficarra V, Novella G et al (2005) The potential impact of prostate volume in the planning of optimal number of cores in the systematic transperineal prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 48(6):932–937

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Finne P, Stenman UH et al (2003) The Finnish trial of prostate cancer screening: where are we now? BJU Int 92(suppl 2):22–26

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ghavamian R, Blute ML et al (1999) Comparison of clinically nonpalpable prostate-specific antigen-detected (cT1c) versus palpable (cT2) prostate cancers in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 54(1):105–110

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gohagan JK, Prorok PC et al (2000) The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial of the National Cancer Institute: history, organization, and status. Control Clin Trials 21(suppl 6):251S–272S

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gosselaar C, Roobol MJ et al (2005) Prevalence and characteristics of screen-detected prostate carcinomas at low prostate-specific antigen levels: aggressive or insignificant? BJU Int 95(2):231–237

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gosselaar C, Roobol MJ et al (2006) Screening for prostate cancer without digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasound: results after four years in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), Rotterdam. Prostate 66(6):625–631

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gosselaar C, Kranse R et al (2008) The interobserver variability of digital rectal examination in a large randomized trial for the screening of prostate cancer. Prostate 68(9):985–993

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Grubb RL 3rd, Pinsky PF et al (2008) Prostate cancer screening in the prostate, lung, colorectal and ovarian cancer screening trial: update on findings from the initial four rounds of screening in a randomized trial. BJU Int 102(11):1524–1530

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Habbema JD, van Oortmarssen GJ et al (1982) Mass screening for cancer: the interpretation of findings and the prediction of effects on morbidity and mortality. Clin Lab Med 2(3):627–638

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heijnsdijk EA, der Kinderen A et al (2009) Overdetection, overtreatment and costs in prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer. Br J Cancer 101(11):1833–1838

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hugosson J, Aus G et al (2003) Population-based screening for prostate cancer by measuring free and total serum prostate-specific antigen in Sweden. BJU Int 92(suppl 2):39–43

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hugosson J, Carlsson S et al (2010) Mortality results from the Goteborg randomised population-based ­prostate-cancer screening trial. Lancet Oncol 11(8):725–732

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ilic D, O’Connor D et al (2011) Screening for prostate cancer: an updated Cochrane systematic review. BJU Int 107(6):882–891

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jemal A, Center MM et al (2010) Global patterns of cancer incidence and mortality rates and trends. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. Aug;19(8):1893-907. Epub Jul 20 Review

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johns LE, Houlston RS (2003) A systematic review and meta-analysis of familial prostate cancer risk. BJU Int 91(9):789–794

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kjellman A, Akre O et al (2009) 15-year followup of a population based prostate cancer screening study. J Urol 181(4):1615–1621; discussion 1621

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Korfage IJ, Essink-Bot ML et al (2005) Five-year follow-up of health-related quality of life after primary treatment of localized prostate cancer. Int J Cancer 116(2):291–296

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Krumholtz JS, Carvalhal GF et al (2002) Prostate-specific antigen cutoff of 2.6 ng/mL for prostate cancer screening is associated with favorable pathologic tumor features. Urology 60(3):469–473; discussion 473–464

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kwiatkowski M, Huber A et al (2003) Features and preliminary results of prostate cancer screening in Canton Aargau, Switzerland. BJU Int 92(suppl 2):44–47

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Labrie F, Candas B et al (2004) Screening decreases prostate cancer mortality: 11-year follow-up of the 1988 Quebec prospective randomized controlled trial. Prostate 59(3):311–318

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lilja H, Ulmert D et al (2007) Long-term prediction of prostate cancer up to 25 years before diagnosis of prostate cancer using prostate kallikreins measured at age 44 to 50 years. J Clin Oncol 25(4):431–436

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Loeb S, Roehl KA et al (2007) Prostate specific antigen velocity in men with total prostate specific antigen less than 4 ng/ml. J Urol 178(6):2348–2352; discussion 2352–2343

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Loeb S, Roehl KA et al (2010) Can prostate specific antigen velocity thresholds decrease insignificant prostate cancer detection? J Urol 183(1):112–116

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McLellan DL, Norman RW (1995) Hereditary aspects of prostate cancer. CMAJ 153(7):895–900

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miller AB, Madalinska JB et al (2001) Health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness studies in the European randomised study of screening for prostate cancer and the US prostate, lung, colon and ovary trial. Eur J Cancer 37(17):2154–2160

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mols F, Korfage IJ et al (2009) Bowel, urinary, and sexual problems among long-term prostate cancer survivors: a population-based study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 73(1):30–38

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen CT, Kattan MW (2011) How to tell if a new marker improves prediction. Eur Urol 60(2):226–228

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oberaigner W, Siebert U et al (2011) Prostate-specific antigen testing in Tyrol, Austria: prostate cancer mortality reduction was supported by an update with mortality data up to 2008. Int J Public Health Jun 17 [Epub ahead of print]

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira M, Marques V et al (2011) Head-to-head comparison of two online nomograms for prostate biopsy outcome prediction. BJU Int 107(11):1780–1783

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Otto SJ, van der Cruijsen IW et al (2003) Effective PSA contamination in the Rotterdam section of the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer. Int J Cancer 105(3):394–399

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Paul R, Scholer S et al (2004) Morbidity of prostatic biopsy for different biopsy strategies: is there a relation to core number and sampling region? Eur Urol 45(4):450–455; discussion 456

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pienta KJ (2009) Critical appraisal of prostate-specific antigen in prostate cancer screening: 20 years later. Urology 73(suppl 5):S11–S20

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Postma R, Schroder FH et al (2007) Cancer detection and cancer characteristics in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) – section Rotterdam. A comparison of two rounds of screening. Eur Urol 52(1):89–97

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Raaijmakers R, Wildhagen MF et al (2004) Prostate-specific antigen change in the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer, section Rotterdam. Urology 63(2):316–320

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rao AR, Motiwala HG et al (2008) The discovery of prostate-specific antigen. BJU Int 101(1):5–10

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Roemeling S, Roobol MJ et al (2007) Active surveillance for prostate cancers detected in three subsequent rounds of a screening trial: characteristics, PSA doubling times, and outcome. Eur Urol 51(5):1244–1250; discussion 1251

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roobol MJ, Schroder FH (2003) European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer: achievements and presentation. BJU Int 92(suppl 2):117–122

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roobol MJ, Kranse R et al (2004) Prostate-specific antigen velocity at low prostate-specific antigen levels as screening tool for prostate cancer: results of second screening round of ERSPC (ROTTERDAM). Urology 63(2):309–313; discussion 313–305

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Roobol MJ, Roobol DW et al (2005) Is additional testing necessary in men with prostate-specific antigen levels of 1.0 ng/mL or less in a population-based screening setting? (ERSPC, section Rotterdam). Urology 65(2):343–346

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roobol MJ, Grenabo A et al (2007) Interval cancers in prostate cancer screening: comparing 2- and 4-year screening intervals in the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer, Gothenburg and Rotterdam. J Natl Cancer Inst 99(17):1296–1303

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roobol MJ, Kerkhof M et al (2009) Prostate cancer mortality reduction by prostate-specific antigen-based screening adjusted for nonattendance and contamination in the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). Eur Urol 56:584–591

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roobol MJ, Schroder FH et al (2010a) Performance of the prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) gene and prostate-specific antigen in prescreened men: exploring the value of PCA3 for a first-line diagnostic test. Eur Urol 58(4):475–481

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Roobol MJ, Steyerberg EW et al (2010b) A risk-based strategy improves prostate-specific antigen-driven detection of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 57:79–85

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sanda MG, Dunn RL et al (2008) Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors. N Engl J Med 358(12):1250–1261

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sandblom G, Varenhorst E et al (2004) Clinical consequences of screening for prostate cancer: 15 years follow-up of a randomised controlled trial in Sweden. Eur Urol 46(6):717–723; discussion 724

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schroder FH, van der Maas P et al (1998) Evaluation of the digital rectal examination as a screening test for prostate cancer. Rotterdam section of the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 90(23):1817–1823

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schroder FH, Denis LJ et al (2003) The story of the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer. BJU Int 92(suppl 2):1–13

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schroder FH, Carter HB et al (2008) Early detection of prostate cancer in 2007. Part 1: PSA and PSA kinetics. Eur Urol 53(3):468–477

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schroder FH, Hugosson J et al (2009) Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 360(13):1320–1328

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schroder FH, van den Bergh RC et al (2010) Eleven-year outcome of patients with prostate cancers diagnosed during screening after initial negative sextant biopsies. Eur Urol 57:256–266, Epub 2009 Nov 6

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schröder FH, Hugosson J et al (2011) Prostate Cancer Mortality at 11 years of Follow-up in the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). Accepted for publication New England Journal of Medicine, March 2012

    Google Scholar 

  • Sciarra A, Barentsz J et al (2011) Advances in magnetic resonance imaging: how they are changing the management of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 59(6):962–977

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sindhwani P, Wilson CM (2005) Prostatitis and serum prostate-specific antigen. Curr Urol Rep 6(4):307–312

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith DS, Catalona WJ (1995) Interexaminer variability of digital rectal examination in detecting prostate cancer. Urology 45(1):70–74

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson IM, Ankerst DP (2007) Prostate-specific antigen in the early detection of prostate cancer. CMAJ 176(13):1853–1858

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson IM, Rounder JB et al (1987) Impact of routine screening for adenocarcinoma of the prostate on stage distribution. J Urol 137(3):424–426

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson IM, Pauler DK et al (2004) Prevalence of prostate cancer among men with a prostate-specific antigen level < or =4.0 ng per milliliter. N Engl J Med 350:2239–2246

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Trottier G, Lawrentschuk N et al (2010) Prevention strategies in prostate cancer. Curr Oncol 17(suppl 2):S4–S10

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Vugt HA, Roobol MJ et al (2011) Compliance with biopsy recommendations of a prostate cancer risk calculator. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10611.x. BJU Int Sep 20 [Epub ahead of print]

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van den Bergh RC, Roobol MJ, Wolters T, van Leeuwen PJ, Schröder FH et al (2008) The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculators indicating a positive prostate biopsy: a comparison. BJU Int 102(9):1068–73, Epub 2008 Aug 18

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van der Cruijsen-Koeter IW, Roobol MJ et al (2006) Tumor characteristics and prognostic factors in two subsequent screening rounds with four-year interval within prostate cancer screening trial, ERSPC Rotterdam. Urology 68(3):615–620

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Leeuwen P, van den Bergh R et al (2009) Screening: should more biopsies be taken in larger prostates? BJU Int 104(7):919–924

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Leeuwen PJ, Connolly D et al (2010) Prostate cancer mortality in screen and clinically detected prostate cancer: estimating the screening benefit. Eur J Cancer 46:377–383, Epub 2009 Oct 5

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vashi AR, Wojno KJ et al (1998) A model for the number of cores per prostate biopsy based on patient age and prostate gland volume. J Urol 159(3):920–924

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vickers AJ, Wolters T et al (2009) Prostate-specific antigen velocity for early detection of prostate cancer: result from a large, representative, population-based cohort. Eur Urol 56(5):753–760

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vickers AJ, Cronin AM et al (2010a) Prostate specific antigen concentration at age 60 and death or ­metastasis from prostate cancer: case-control study. BMJ 341:c4521

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vickers AJ, Cronin AM et al (2010b) A four-kallikrein panel predicts prostate cancer in men with recent screening: data from the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer, Rotterdam. Clin Cancer Res 16(12):3232–3239

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vickers AJ, Till C et al (2011) An empirical evaluation of guidelines on prostate-specific antigen velocity in prostate cancer detection. J Natl Cancer Inst 103(6):462–469

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Villers A, Malavaud B et al (2003) ERSPC: features and preliminary results of France. BJU Int 92(suppl 2):27–29

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • White WM, Sadetsky N et al (2008) Quality of life in men with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the prostate: an exploratory analysis using data from the CaPSURE database. J Urol 180(6):2409–2413

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson JM, Jungner YG (1968) Principles and practice of mass screening for disease. Bol Oficina Sanit Panam 65(4):281–393

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wolters T, Roobol MJ et al (2010a) The effect of study arm on prostate cancer treatment in a large screening trial (ERSPC). Int J Cancer 126:2387–2393

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wolters T, Vissers KJ et al (2010b) The value of EZH2, p27(kip1), BMI-1 and MIB-1 on biopsy specimens with low-risk prostate cancer in selecting men with significant prostate cancer at prostatectomy. BJU Int 106(2):280–286

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yamamoto T, Ito K et al (2001) Diagnostic significance of digital rectal examination and transrectal ­ultrasonography in men with prostate-specific antigen levels of 4 NG/ML or less. Urology 58(6):994–998

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zani EL, Clark OA et al (2011) Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 5:CD006576

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu X, van Leeuwen PJ et al (2011) Disease-specific ­survival of men with prostate cancer detected during the screening interval: results of the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer-Rotterdam after 11 years of follow-up. Eur Urol 60(2):330–336

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Erasmus MC, H-1093, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Chris H. Bangma M.D., Ph.D.

  2. Department of Urology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Pim J. van Leeuwen & Monique J. Roobol

Authors
  1. Chris H. Bangma M.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pim J. van Leeuwen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Monique J. Roobol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris H. Bangma M.D., Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, University Hospital, BP 217X, Grenoble, 38043, France

    Michel Bolla

  2. , Department of Urology, University Hospital, Herestraat 49, Leuven, 3000, Belgium

    Hendrik van Poppel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bangma, C.H., van Leeuwen, P.J., Roobol, M.J. (2012). Individual and Mass Screening. In: Bolla, M., van Poppel, H. (eds) Management of Prostate Cancer. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27597-5_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27597-5_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-27596-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-27597-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation