Se afișează postările cu eticheta Screening. Afișați toate postările
Se afișează postările cu eticheta Screening. Afișați toate postările

joi, 15 decembrie 2011

Biopsy Referral After PSA Screening Stays Consistent Over Time

Main Category: Prostate / Prostate Cancer
Article Date: 15 Dec 2011 - 0:00 PST

email icon email to a friend   printer icon printer friendly   write icon opinions  
not yet ratednot yet rated
After the US Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial found cancer in many men with low levels of prostate specific antigen (PSA), many debated which PSA level should lead to a biopsy recommendation. The US Preventive Screening Task Force (USPSTF) recently concluded, amid considerable controversy, that the evidence does not support recommending PSA screening for men under 75 years old at all, because the risks outweigh the benefits. Now, a study shows that physicians in a large Washington state health plan were being conservative in biopsy referral even before the USPSTF recommendation.

"Despite considerable recent debate about lowering the threshold for referring men to biopsy, we detected no change toward more aggressive biopsy referral practices in data spanning more than a decade for one integrated delivery system," says lead author Steven Zeliadt, PhD, of the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Seattle, Washington. "In fact, we observed an opposite pattern, with biopsies becoming slightly less common over the study period. This may reflect growing awareness of the problems of overdiagnosis and overtreatment - and the fact that many men die with prostate cancer but not from it."

Controversy is longstanding about what PSA threshold should be used to refer men for biopsy. The generally accepted standard is 4.0 ng/mL. However, some have urged lowering the level to 2.5 ng/mL, abandoning a specific cutoff altogether, or measuring the PSA velocity, or change over time, instead of absolute level. Dr. Zeliadt and his colleagues set out to determine if the actual biopsy referral practices in a community setting had changed in response to new recommendations, and to determine if PSA velocity is associated with follow-up biopsy.

The study examined PSA tests in members of Group Health, a health plan in Washington State and Northern Idaho, between 1997 and 2008. The final sample included 111,369 index tests among 54,831 subjects. For each test, the study evaluated the PSA level and velocity and the specific follow-up: receiving a biopsy within a year after the test date; attending a urology appointment within a year without biopsy; additional PSA testing within a year with no urology visit; and no PSA-related follow-up.

The researchers found that of tests with a PSA value greater than 4.0 ng/mL, 28% led to a biopsy within 12 months, and 38.6% were followed up by a urologist but did not result in a biopsy. Biopsies were slightly more common in the early years of the study, but biopsy rates did not differ over time for men with mild to moderate PSA levels. The threshold used for biopsy referral appeared not to change over time.

PSA velocity was strongly associated with biopsy. Among men whose PSA tests exceeded 4.0 ng/mL, those with a rapidly rising velocity were more likely to undergo biopsy. This rate was also consistent across the years of the study. "PSA velocity has been promoted for many years as having value for predicting death from prostate cancer, although several recent studies and evidence from screening trials have demonstrated that in practice, velocity adds little value. This is not surprising given that PSA is a continuous marker, and a rapid rise may be likely to trigger follow-up, thus reducing rates of death from prostate cancer," notes Dr. Zeliadt.

"Even small changes in the PSA threshold can substantially alter the potential harms and benefits of screening. However, providers have limited evidence to help them discuss this with patients," concludes Dr. Zeliadt, who is also affiliated with Group Health Research Institute and the University of Washington. "This study highlights the importance of acknowledging that how aggressively patients are referred for biopsy is an important component of the PSA screening discussion."

Article adapted by Medical News Today from original press release. Click 'references' tab above for source.
Visit our prostate / prostate cancer section for the latest news on this subject. The article is "Biopsy Follow-Up of Prostate-Specific Antigen Tests," by S.B. Zeliadt, D.S. Buist, R.J. Reid, D.C. Grossman, J. Ma, and R. Etzioni (doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.08.024). The article appears in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Volume 42, Issue 1 (January 2012), published by Elsevier.
Elsevier Health Sciences Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

MLA

Elsevier Health Sciences. "Biopsy Referral After PSA Screening Stays Consistent Over Time." Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 15 Dec. 2011. Web.
15 Dec. 2011. APA

Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.


Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.

If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.

All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)

Contact Our News Editors

For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.

Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:

Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.



View the original article here

marți, 13 decembrie 2011

Cancer Screening In Older Patients Very Common

Editor's Choice
Academic Journal
Main Category: Cancer / Oncology
Also Included In: Seniors / Aging
Article Date: 13 Dec 2011 - 0:00 PST

email icon email to a friend   printer icon printer friendly   write icon opinions  
4 stars4 stars
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines recommend against routine cancer screening, especially for breast, cervical, colorectal and prostate cancer, but adults 75 and older are still receiving regular cancer screenings. The report published in the December 12/26 issue of Archives of Internal Medicine, one of the JAMA/Archives journals, is a part of the journal's Less is More series, the aim is to educate healthcare professionals and patients alike in cuttings costs, but having a better service at the same time.

The authors write as background information in the article :

"In the United States, the number of adults 65 years or older, currently estimated at 36.8 million, is expected to double by the year 2030. Providing high-quality care to this growing population while attempting to contain costs will pose a significant challenge ...
While a great deal is known about cancer screening behaviors and trends in young and middle-aged adults, less is known about screening behaviors in older adults from different racial backgrounds."

Keith M. Bellizzi, Ph.D., M.P.H., of the University of Connecticut, Storrs, and colleagues analyzed data from the National Health Interview Survey, an annual in-person nationwide survey used to track health trends in U.S. citizens, to estimate the prevalence of cancer screening among older, racially diverse adults. The study population included 49,575 individuals, 1,697 of whom were 75 to 79 years of age and 2,376 were 80 years of age and older.

Percentages of those reporting cancer screenings are as follows : 62 percent Women age 75 to 79 - A mammogram within the past two years.50 percent of women age 80 and older - A mammogram within the past two years. 53 percent of women ages 75 to 79 - A Papanicolaou screen (also known as a pap smear or pap test) for cervical cancer within the past three years. 38 percent of women ages 80 and older - A pap smear within the past three years.57 percent highest of men and women 75 to 79 - Screenings for colorectal cancer. 57 percent of Men 75-79 - Prostate cancer screening.42 percent of Men 80 and older - Prostate cancer screening.40 percent of Men 50-74 and older - Prostate cancer screeningAnalysis showed large differences in breast, colorectal and prostate cancer screening among older adults, but the authors found that these differences were accounted for by low education.

Individuals without a high school diploma were significantly less likely to be screened for breast, cervical and prostate cancer, compared with adults older than 75 years with a college degree. Adults older than 75 years were also significantly more likely to be screened for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer if a physician recommended the test.

The authors concluded :

"A high percentage of older adults continue to be screened in the face of ambiguity of recommendations for this group ... Prevalence results from this study can serve as a benchmark for progress as we move the science of cancer screening in older, diverse adults forward."

In additional commentary, Louise C. Walter, M.D., of the University of California, San Francisco and San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, writes that :

"There are no quality measures that address appropriate target rates for cancer screening in persons older than 75 years ...

While at extremes in older age the likelihood of surviving long enough to benefit from potential detection and treatment of asymptomatic cancer becomes quite small and the likelihood of harm becomes quite large irrespective of other factors, Bellizzi et al were not able to calculate screening rates in subgroups older than 85 years owing to the small number participating in the survey ...

Still, the data by Bellizzi et al raise the issue of whether quality measures should address the overuse of cancer screening."

Dr. Walter concludes :

"While it is useful to determine screening rates among persons in whom screening will likely result in net benefit or net harm, between these two groups is a large number of older persons in whom screening offers small or uncertain net benefit ...

For these persons, the decision about whether the potential benefits of screening outweigh the risks is a value judgment that requires informed decision-making ...

While arguments persists about what is the 'right' rate of cancer screening in older persons, it seems clear that the rate of informed decision-making should approach 100 percent."

Written by Rupert Shepherd
Copyright: Medical News Today
Not to be reproduced without permission of Medical News Today Visit our cancer / oncology section for the latest news on this subject. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171[22]:2031-2037.

Arch Intern Med. 2011;171[22]:2037-2038.

Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

MLA

Rupert Shepherd B.Sc. "Cancer Screening In Older Patients Very Common." Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 13 Dec. 2011. Web.
13 Dec. 2011. APA

Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.


Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.

If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.

All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)

Contact Our News Editors

For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.

Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:

Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.



View the original article here

duminică, 11 decembrie 2011

New Study Supports Claim That Breast Screening May Be Causing More Harm Than Good

Main Category: Breast Cancer
Also Included In: Preventive Medicine
Article Date: 11 Dec 2011 - 0:00 PST

email icon email to a friend   printer icon printer friendly   write icon opinions  
not yet ratednot yet rated
A new study published on bmj.com supports the claim that the introduction of breast cancer screening in the UK may have caused more harm than good.

Harms included false positives (abnormal results that turn out to be normal) and overtreatment (treatment of harmless cancers that would never have caused symptoms or death during a patient's lifetime). This may be because the cancer grows so slowly that the patient dies of other causes before it produces symptoms, or the cancer remains dormant or regresses.

It shows that the harms of screening largely offset the benefits up to 10 years, after which the benefits accumulate, but by much less than predicted when screening was first started.

The Forrest report in 1986, which led to the introduction of breast cancer screening in the UK, estimated the number of screened and unscreened women surviving each year over a 15-year period. Costs and benefits were measured in quality adjusted life years or QALYs (a combined measure of quantity and quality of life) but it omitted harms.

It suggested that screening would reduce the death rate from breast cancer by almost one third with few harms and at low cost.

Since the Forrest report, the harms of breast cancer screening have been acknowledged. So, researchers at the University of Southampton set out to update the report's survival estimates by combining the benefits and harms of screening in one single measure.

The results are based on 100,000 women aged 50 and over surviving by year up to 20 years after entry to the screening programme.

Inclusion of false positives and unnecessary surgery reduced the benefits of screening by about half. The best estimates generated negative net QALYs for up to eight years after screening and minimal gains after 10 years.

After 20 years, net QALYs accumulate, but by much less than predicted by the Forrest report.

The authors say more research is needed on the extent of unnecessary treatment and its impact on quality of life. They also call for improved ways of identifying those most likely to benefit from surgery and for measuring the levels and duration of the harms from surgery. From a public perspective, the meaning and implications of overdiagnosis and overtreatment need to be much better explained and communicated to any woman considering screening, they add.

However, the continuing uncertainty surrounding the extent of overtreatment is apparent in a study of French women published on bmj.com last month, which put overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer due to screening at around 1%.

Article adapted by Medical News Today from original press release. Click 'references' tab above for source.
Visit our breast cancer section for the latest news on this subject. Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

MLA

BMJ-British Medical Journal. "New Study Supports Claim That Breast Screening May Be Causing More Harm Than Good." Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 11 Dec. 2011. Web.
11 Dec. 2011. APA

Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.


Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.

If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.

All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)

Contact Our News Editors

For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.

Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:

Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.



View the original article here

vineri, 9 decembrie 2011

Routine Breast Screening May Do More Harm Than Good

Editor's Choice
Academic Journal
Main Category: Breast Cancer
Also Included In: Radiology / Nuclear Medicine
Article Date: 09 Dec 2011 - 13:00 PST

email icon email to a friend   printer icon printer friendly   write icon opinions  
2 stars5 stars
The introduction of routine breast screening may have resulted in more harm than benefits, researchers from the University of Southampton, England, reported in BMJ (British Medical Journal). They explain that examples of harms include abnormal results that eventually prove to be normal ones (false positives), and treating patients for cancers that are harmless and would not threaten the woman's lifespan (overtreatment).

Authors James Raftery and Maria Chorozoglou found that the harms caused by routine mammographies generally offset the benefits by nearly ten years, after which the benefits start building up. However, they never accumulate by as much as experts had predicted when screening started.

A 1986 report - the Forrest Report - estimated how many screened and unscreened females would survive over a 15-year period; the estimate was for each year, up to 15 years. The results of the estimate persuaded health authorities in the UK to start routine breast screening.

They worked out costs and benefits in QALYs (quality adjusted life years) - this is a combination of quantity and quality of life measurement. They did not account for harms. They estimated that by introducing routine breast cancer screening, which they thought had few harms and are not costly, would lower breast cancer mortality rates by nearly one third.

Since 1986, experts have accepted that there are harms associated with routine breast cancer screening. The Southampton researchers set out to update the survival estimates of the report by turning the combined benefits and harms of mammographies into a single measure.

MammographyinprocessGraphic
A female having a mammogram

They gathered data on 100,000 females, all aged 50+ years who survived up to two decades after initially entering the mammography program. The researchers established that the benefits of screening were approximately halved when false positives and unnecessary surgery were included.

According to their best estimates, the results were negative net QALYs for up to 8 years following screening with no significant gains after one decade, whilst net QALYs accumulate after 20 years, yet by significantly less than previously predicted by the Forrest report.

The authors of the study state that the extent of unnecessary treatments and their impact on women's quality of life requires more research, calling to improve methods that identify those women who would potentially benefit most from surgery, and to calculate the levels and duration of the harms from surgery.

They also comment that the meaning and implications of over-diagnosis and over-treatment have to be explained much better from a public point of view, so that women who consider screening gain a better understanding.

According to a study on French women published last month in bmj.com, the ongoing uncertainty regarding the extent of over-treatment is apparent with 1% of women being over-diagnosed with invasive breast cancer because of screening.

Written by Petra Rattue
Copyright: Medical News Today
Not to be reproduced without permission of Medical News Today

Visit our breast cancer section for the latest news on this subject. "Possible net harms of breast cancer screening: updated modelling of Forrest report"
James Raftery and Maria Chorozoglou
BMJ 2011; 343 doi: 10.1136/bmj.d7627 (Published 8 December 2011) Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

MLA

Christian Nordqvist. "Routine Breast Screening May Do More Harm Than Good." Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 9 Dec. 2011. Web.
9 Dec. 2011. APA

Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.


Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.

If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.

All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)

Contact Our News Editors

For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.

Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:

Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.



View the original article here