I often talk about PSA screening for prostate cancer. The USPSTF recently did not recommend screening men age 75 or older.
PSAs have not been shown to improve mortality, and can lead to a slew of unnecessary biopsies and anxiety.
Predictably, urologists do not agree, as more PSA screenings lead to more revenue-generating workups.
The unnecessary testing brigade over at Dartmouth, summarizes the arguments for and against testing in a Boston Globe op-ed.
It rebukes the rampant, uncritical, publicity that the media and celebrities give to prostate cancer screening.
I’m not saying don’t do it, but go in with your eyes open and realize it isn’t a black and white issue:
Prostate screening has been heavily marketed to the public for years in ways that have exaggerated the risk of cancer and the benefit and safety of screening.To really help men, we need to help them understand the risks they face and which ones can be reduced with interventions of proven benefit.
Related posts:
- Should I get a PSA test for prostate cancer? A new study shows that screening for prostate cancer doesn’t necessarily save lives
- Prostate cancer screening in men over 75
- Who’s not happy with the new prostate cancer screening recommendations?
- Prostate cancer screening in blacks, and the lack of balanced information
- What’s the latest on prostate cancer and the PSA screening test?
- How screening for prostate cancer can be a gamble, and why either screening or not has consequences
- PSA and prostate cancer screening
{ 1 comment }
I must say I agree wholeheartedly. Case in point: my father, who 11 years ago was diagnosed with prostate cancer, largely on a series of PSA results. He & his oncologist chose seed implant therapy, which was promoted as an easy, minimal side effect option. Fast forward to the present day, where is he is age 85 and largely bowel & urinary incontinent. After several years of going to the gastroenterologist (diagnosis: chronic colitis), the GI PA told me (his patient advocate & caregiver) that seed implant therapy destroys not only cancer cells, but the nerve endings at the end of colon & rectum, so that the sensation to evacuate is impaired. Finally, I had an explanation of why he spent at least an hour a day on the toilet (in toto) and would say he had to go, but often could not; and why he often evacuated before he could get to a toilet.
I wondered at the time of the diagnosis if anyone explained to him the concept of "watchful waiting" (a definite option for those with prostate cancer in advanced years); now I really think someone should have definitely explained that to him.
Comments on this entry are closed.