Posted on 12/08/2022 7:10:06 AM PST by devane617
In screening for prostate cancer, the risk of overdiagnosis can be halved, a University of Gothenburg study shows. With the proposed diagnostic pathway, considerably fewer harmless tumors are found. This solves a big problem and makes general screening feasible.
Researchers at Sahlgrenska Academy, part of Gothenburg University, and Sahlgrenska University Hospital performed the present study, which is now published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
It focuses on a major problem in screening for prostate cancer: a very high proportion of the cancer cases detected represent small, usually harmless tumors. This carries a risk of many men being treated unnecessarily, with the associated risk of permanent complications in the form of urinary incontinence and impotence—effects that adversely affect their quality of life.
Focus on targeted tissue samples
In the present study, 37,887 men in Sweden aged 50–60 years were invited to take the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood test. In the event of their PSA levels being elevated, they were offered magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate. The 17,980 men who took part (47% of all invitees) were divided into two groups.
(Excerpt) Read more at medicalxpress.com ...
I showed a PSA increase & they proscribed this MRI with contrast.
Biopsy would’ve followed if they’da found anything. I was very pleased the biopsy wasn’t the go to option.
I don’t see why this is breaking as a discovery and new.
The MRI screen is commonly known but not commonly used. Insurance / medicare will not pay for it with low PSA so PSA remains the primary screening tool prior to MRI upon elevated PSA for some enlightened physicians.
I think urologists hate the procedure because it cuts them out of the process for biopsy. A friend just went through this when two urologists refused to write orders for the MRI, the third one did and this was in Houston. Out here where I live you are as likely as not to get a response such as, “What is an MRI?”
I was Dx’d in 2007 after biopsy and for a fact it is not a pleasant process. I had a tiny amount of cancer and very early stage, but at age 52 I had no option but to treat it. However, for those that are older I would never submit to a biopsy before I had an MRI.
It is a money game for sure. Uro gets the fee for a biopsy but noting for an MRI.
PSA has been creeping up for a couple years, so I had the preliminary MRI just this year, which showed a small lump of some sort in my prostate. So doc scheduled a biopsy. which found that the lump is benign, but found a few low grade cancer cells in 1 of 15 samples. His advice is to let it alone and do quarterly PSA - if PSA shows a sharp rise might do something about it then. He said I might never need actual treatment, which I take as a positive outcome.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.