UK study of PC screening

Maybe we all should re-read the OP's initial comment. As he says, this study SUGGESTS that routine screening without symptoms is unnecessary and harmful.

I suspect that most of us can agree with the "suggests," but balk at the idea that this study, or even a number of studies PROVE that screening is unnecessary and harmful. I've always felt that the PSA test is a bogeyman, when the real issue is treatment decisions that follow the test. More docs following more conservative protocols could solve those problems.

If this were really "settled science," if has really been PROVEN, why would further studies be conducted? So, I'll accept that this particular study, and some others, SUGGEST the aforementioned conclusions, but we've all seen how scientific thinking on matters like this can evolve and change over time.

I will say, though, that it's an absolute fact that the only thing that finally convinced me to address my prostate cancer was a series of annual PSA tests that showed steadily progressing numbers, starting in the range of two, but gradually reaching about 6.2. I realize that this scenario is different from the study under discussion, but a series of PSA tests still starts with just one.

So, in my own case, I say thank the good Lord for the PSA test. As for my personal SE's, let's just say I refuse to dwell on that. Every cancer, every major surgery, likely involves SE's.

Tall Allen....can I start developing a business plan for 'our' physician travelling advise service?

Gear-

The goal of the study was to prove whether population-based PSA screening had any benefit. It did not. They estimate (but did not measure) that only about 10%-15% of men in the control group had PSA tests over the 10-year period. This is a different question from asking: in men undergoing PSA testing for PC, what protocol should be followed in order to establish a pattern? It is by observing a pattern over time that unnecessary biopsies may be avoided.

Overtreatment means treatment for PC that makes no difference in survival (over the next ten years, in this study). Where did you see that 50% were overtreated? In the treatment group, 1.7% were diagnosed with GS 6 out of a total of 4.3% diagnosed with any PC. That means their overdiagnosis rate was up to 40%. The overdiagnosis rate was up to 31% in the control group.

Allen, My bad, I mixed in the Swiss study that was brought up. Thanks.

The thread is back on track...thank you....Tudpock...edit...delete...ban...simple...suck it up...all you sinners...think Burt Lancaster as Elmer Gantry...That's a compliment...Tuck...for sure...