Clinical trial · Interventional
The ProCaRis Study: Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment in General Practice
Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment Using Genetic Markers in General Practice
- Source
- ClinicalTrials.gov
- Retrieved
- Sep 8, 2026
- Layer
- normalized (units and labels harmonized; values unchanged)
- Run
- ING-CLINICALTRIALS-20260908-000001
Summary
Brief summary (as posted)
The preferred method for early detection of prostate cancer (PCa) in older men with family history is the Prostate Specific Antigen test (PSA test), although the method is imprecise. It produces a high number of false-positive results and increases the risk of over-diagnosis and over-treatment. Yet, an increasing number of men get the PSA test as part of unsystematic screening. Genetic risk assessment may be a better way to identify men with low risk of PCa. The main study hypothesis is that genetic information about low risk of PCa can reduce the number of patients who get a PSA test as part of unsystematic screening.
Conditions
Conditions (1)
Free-text conditions as registered, with the CancerIndex entity they were reconciled to and the match type.
| Condition (as posted) | Mapped entity | Match | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prostate Cancer | Malignant Prostate Neoplasm | CURATED_EXACT | 0.92 |
Interventions
Interventions (1)
| Intervention | Type | Mapped drug | Match |
|---|---|---|---|
| Genetic risk assessment | Genetic | — | UNRESOLVED |
Design
Arms and outcomes
Arms (2)
- type
- EXPERIMENTAL
- label
- Genetic risk assessment
- description
- At least 40 SNP (single nucleotide polymorphisms)increase the risk of PCa. The individual risk of PCa accumulates with the increasing number of these genetic variants. The risk is doubled if patient has familial disposition as well. In retrospective studies, non-genetic risk-prediction models were compared to risk-prediction models containing both non-genetic factors and SNPs analyses. The genetic models had a significantly higher specificity than the non-genetic models. It has been argued that genetic PCa risk assessment could reduce the inexpedient use of PSA tests, saving it for patients at high risk of PCa.
- interventionNames
- Genetic: Genetic risk assessment
- type
- NO_INTERVENTION
- label
- Familial disposition risk assessment
Primary outcomes (1)
- measure
- Number of low risk patients who get a PSA test
- timeFrame
- 1 year, 2 years
Eligibility
Eligibility (as posted)
- Sex
- Male
- Minimum age
- 18 Years
- Maximum age
- 80 Years
Show eligibility criteria text
Inclusion Criteria: * patients who receive a PSA test Exclusion Criteria: * age over 80 years * elevated PSA-level (\> 4,0 ng/ml) concurrently or within previous 2 years * prostate or bladder disease * prostate cancer * non-Caucasians * do not speak and understand Danish
References
Publications (4)
- BACKGROUNDFredsoe J, Kirkegaard P, Edwards A, Vedsted P, Sorensen KD, Bro F. A genetic risk assessment for prostate cancer influences patients' risk perception and use of repeat PSA testing: a cross-sectional study in Danish general practice. BJGP Open. 2020 Jun 23;4(2):bjgpopen20X101039. doi: 10.3399/bjgpopen20X101039. Print 2020. PMID 32457098
- BACKGROUNDFredsoe J, Koetsenruyter J, Vedsted P, Kirkegaard P, Vaeth M, Edwards A, Orntoft TF, Sorensen KD, Bro F. The effect of assessing genetic risk of prostate cancer on the use of PSA tests in primary care: A cluster randomized controlled trial. PLoS Med. 2020 Feb 7;17(2):e1003033. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003033. eCollection 2020 Feb. PMID 32032355
- BACKGROUNDKirkegaard P, Edwards A, Nielsen TLO, Orntoft TF, Sorensen KD, Borre M, Bro F. Perceptions about screening for prostate cancer using genetic lifetime risk assessment: a qualitative study. BMC Fam Pract. 2018 Feb 17;19(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s12875-018-0717-6. PMID 29454309
- DERIVEDKirkegaard P, Vedsted P, Edwards A, Fenger-Gron M, Bro F. A cluster-randomised, parallel group, controlled intervention study of genetic prostate cancer risk assessment and use of PSA tests in general practice--the ProCaRis study: study protocol. BMJ Open. 2013 Mar 1;3(3):e002452. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002452. PMID 23457331