Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

  • 1 March 2016 to 28 February 2017
  • Project No: 292
  • Funding round: FR 11

In the UK, prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men with over 40,000 new cases diagnosed each year and approximately 10,000 dying as a direct result of the disease. It is a highly variable disease with some men at risk of serious illness that will harm them, whilst in others the disease is relatively harmless. At present, we don’t know how to get the balance right between 1) the early identification of those with serious disease to prevent the disease from causing harm and 2) minimising the detection of disease which is harmless, for which some may receive unnecessary treatment. Patient and clinician groups have identified this issue as research priority for the National Health Service. Systematic review evidence has identified many prostate cancer prediction models. However, few of the models that use variables in addition to PSA have been external validated, only one of which was validated in a UK population. We plan to test the these models using biological and medical data collected from large numbers of volunteers in the UK BioBank and / or the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer (EPIC) study. Findings from the review will be the first step towards developing an improved risk prediction model for prostate cancer designed for use in the UK male population.

Amount awarded: £24,685

Projects by themes

We have grouped projects under the five SPCR themes in this document

Evidence synthesis working group

The collaboration will be conducting 18 high impact systematic reviews, under four workstreams.