
A screening test for prostate cancer taken by millions of men every year is not terribly accurate, and not even the best result ensures that a man is cancer-free, experts said Tuesday. They found the standard prostate-specific antigen, or PSA test, produces many false positives and false negatives--meaning some men who think they do not have cancer actually do, while others may undergo uncomfortable biopsies only to learn there is no tumor after all.
“Patients have assumed, 'My PSA is below 4. It’s normal. I have no risk,'" Ian Thompson of the University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, who led the study, told a news conference. In fact, some men with PSA levels of 1 had prostate cancer, his study showed. Others with higher PSA levels did not have prostate cancer.
If all men got biopsies when PSA reached 1.1, more than 80% of all prostate cancers would be detected, Thompson said. But 61% of men who got biopsies would turn out not to have cancer. A cutoff of 2.6 would detect only 40.5% of cancer cases. This could explain why some men die of prostate cancer despite intensive screening programs, the researchers said.
“This is going to require a reeducation not just of patients but of physicians,” Thompson said. “What should men do? Our take-home message--they should consider the risk factors.”
“PSA, like blood pressure, like cholesterol, like many other tests, shouldn’t be considered to be 'normal' or 'abnormal' but should be considered as showing a range of risk,” Thompson said.
Men whose fathers or brothers had prostate cancer, African-American men, and others have a higher risk than the general population, for instance, he said. Prostate cancer affects more than 200,000 men a year in the United States and will kill 29,000 in 2005, according to the American Cancer Society. An American man has a 17% lifetime risk of prostate cancer, but only a 3% risk of dying from it. (Reuters)
These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.
Be the first to comment on this story.
If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above.
All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.
Comments that do not concern specific articles in The Advocate or on Advocate.com will not be posted or published. See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.
Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.