International journal of cancer. Journal international du cancer
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Associations of aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug and paracetamol use with PSA-detected prostate cancer: findings from a large, population-based, case-control study (the ProtecT study).
Evidence from laboratory studies suggests that chronic inflammation plays an important role in prostate cancer aetiology. This has resulted in speculation that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may protect against prostate cancer development. We analysed data from a cross-sectional case-control study (n(cases) = 1,016; n(controls) = 5,043), nested within a UK-wide population-based study that used prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing for identification of asymptomatic prostate cancers, to investigate the relationship of aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) and paracetamol use with prostate cancer. ⋯ Aspirin, NSAID and paracetamol use were associated with reduced serum PSA concentrations amongst controls. Our findings do not support the hypothesis that NSAIDs reduce the risk of PSA-detected prostate cancer. Our conclusions are unlikely to be influenced by PSA detection bias because the inverse associations of aspirin, NSAID and paracetamol use with serum PSA would have attenuated (not generated) the observed positive associations.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Cervical cancer patterns with automation-assisted and conventional cytological screening: a randomized study.
The purpose was to evaluate alternative cytological screening methods in population-based screening for cervical cancer up to cancer incidence and mortality outcome. Automation-assisted screening was compared to conventional cytological screening in a randomized design. The study was based on follow-up of 503,391 women invited in the Finnish cervical cancer screening program during 1999-2003. ⋯ Both methods were valid for screening. Because cervical cancer is rare in our country, we cannot rule out small differences between methods. Evidence on alternative methods for cervical cancer screening is increasing and it is thus feasible to evaluate new methods in large-scale population-based screening programs up to cancer outcome.