(29-08-09) Prostate Cancer Testing Doesn't Help, It Harms Men

by S. L. Baker


If you are a man, you've probably had the fear of
prostate cancer drilled into you -- along with the idea that it is critical to
your health, and probably your life, to have regular prostate cancer
screenings. But two just released large randomized trials indicate that if
there is any benefit to screening, it is extraordinarily small. The authors of
a review of this research, just published in CA: A Cancer Journal for
Clinicians, Otis W. Brawley, M.D. of the American Cancer Society and DonnaAnkerst, Ph.D. and Ian M. Thompson, M.D. of the University of Texas HealthScience Center at San Antonio, say that prostate cancer is almost inevitable inmen as they grow older, so a medical goal to find more prostate cancers is notacceptable.

In fact, they point out that principles of good public health
policy call for screenings only if they reduce the risk of death and/or
suffering from prostate cancer, or reduce health care costs when compared witha non-screening scenario. And according to the new research, prostate cancerscreenings do none of these things. But they can cause havoc in a man's life.


Actually, although the mainstream media frequently hawks cancer screenings foreveryone, no major medical group, including the American Cancer Society,currently recommends routine screening for men at average risk for prostatecancer. In an editorial accompanying the CA: A Cancer Journal for Cliniciansstudy review, Peter Boyle, Ph.D., D.Sc., of the International PreventionResearch Institute, Lyon, France and Dr. Brawley state "the real impact andtragedy of prostate cancer screening is the doubling of the lifetime risk of adiagnosis of prostate cancer with little if any decrease in the risk of dyingfrom this disease."

In 1985, before PSA (prostate specific antigen) testing
was available, a US male had an 8.7 percent lifetime risk of being diagnosedwith prostate cancer and his lifetime risk of dying from the cancer was 2.5percent . By 2005, with PSA testing widespread, an American male's lifetime
risk of being diagnosed with prostate cancer had climbed to 17 percent and hehad a three percent risk of dying from the disease.

In a statement to themedia, the authors of the current study point out that even in the best casescenario, applying the findings of a European trial that found PSA screeningled to a 20 percent reduction in the risk of death, the average man who goesthrough PSA testing sees his risk of being labeled a "cancer patient" soar fromabout nine percent to at least 17 percent. However, the screening barely
decreases his risk of prostate cancer death at all -- it only drops from a
lifetime risk of three percent to a lifetime risk of 2.4 percent.

The reportdiscusses how a computer modeling study using National Cancer Institute'sSurveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries estimated thatmore than one in four cancers detected in white males (29 percent) and almost50 percent of cancers detected in black males were over-diagnosed cancers.
What's more, when a similar model using data from Europe was studied, theresearchers estimated a 50 percent over-diagnosis rate of prostate cancer. Whyis this alarming and even harmful to men? Because those diagnosed withclinically insignificant tumors are subject to unnecessary diagnostic tests andunneeded treatment and often suffer psychosocial harm and sexual side effects.


In addition, the authors point out, it is no small thing for men to be stuck
with the label "cancer patient," which can have negative consequences on theirability to earn a living and cost of their health insurance. What's more, overdiagnosing prostate cancer significantly affects five year survival statistics,which makes them totally inaccurate in showing progress in cancer treatment andcontrol.

Bottom line: the researchers conclude that "men should discuss the
now quantifiable risks and benefits of having a PSA test with their physician
and then share in making an informed decision...the weight of the decision
should not be thrown into the patient's lap."

As recently reported in Natural
News, Dr. Brawley also published research in the New England Journal of
Medicine this month showing that prostate cancer screenings are virtually
useless at saving lives (http://www.naturalnews.com/026477_c...). Another
Natural News article pointed out that one good way to avoid prostate cancer isto avoid statin drugs which have been linked to the disease (http://www.naturalnews.com/025218.html).

References:
Screening for Prostate Cancer, Otis
W. Brawley, MD; Donna Ankerst, PhD; and Ian M. Thompson, MD, CA Cancer J Clin,July/Aug 2009 doi:10.3322/caac.20026.

Prostate Cancer: Current Evidence Weighs
Against Population Screening, Peter Boyle, PhD, DSc; Otis W. Brawley, MD, CACancer J Clin, July/Aug 2009 doi:10.3322/caac.20025.

News

---

In evidenza

"L'informazione presente nel sito serve a migliorare, e non a sostituire, il rapporto medico-paziente."

Per coloro che hanno problemi di salute si consiglia di consultare sempre il proprio medico curante.