Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

A urologist’s hypocrisy on prostate cancer screening

Lucy Hornstein, MD
Conditions
November 5, 2013
Share
Tweet
Share

I am furious.

For anyone hiding under a rock the last year or so, the latest recommendations about prostate cancer screening have changed from earlier iterations of “screen everyone with a prostate with a PSA (prostate specific antigen) and a DRE (digital rectal exam, where the “digital” equipment referred to is a finger) every year” to don’t do it at all.

The United States Preventive Services Task force reviewed the literature and came to the conclusion that routine prostate cancer screening does more harm than good, and should not be done. Hear the emphasis on routine. In men with a urinary problem suggestive of prostate cancer, certain men with worrisome family histories for the disease and so forth, the above does not apply. We’re talking about blindly screening all comers. And the bottom line is this: don’t.

Screening is to be offered to patients in the context of “shared decision making,” involving a detailed discussion between doctor and patient about the pros and cons of screening (generally PSA testing).

Great. No problem.

Here’s the thing, though. I just had a patient come back from a urological consult for a problem that had nothing to do with the prostate with an order for a PSA. Oh, I said. Did you have a detailed discussion with the urologist about the pros and cons of PSA screening for prostate cancer?

No.

What did the urologist say to you?

“He said that there were no urologists on the panel that made that recommendation.”

It’s a non sequitur of an ad hominem, perilously close to the barely disguised antisemitism that  discounts evidence of any medical advantages of circumcision.

But it’s the urologist’s hypocrisy that infuriates me the most. If he attributes the negative recommendation to the lack of urological involvement in the guidelines, perhaps he should check out his own specialty’s guidelines:

Guideline Statement 1: The Panel recommends against PSA screening in men under age 40 years. 

Guideline Statement 2: The Panel does not recommend routine screening in men between ages 40 to 54 years at average risk. 

Guideline Statement 3: For men ages 55 to 69 years the Panel recognizes that the decision to undergo PSA screening involves weighing the benefits of preventing prostate cancer mortality in 1 man for every 1,000 men screened over a decade against the known potential harms associated with screening and treatment. For this reason, the Panel strongly recommends shared decision-making for men age 55 to 69 years that are considering PSA screening, and proceeding based on a man’s values and preferences. 

Guideline Statement 4: To reduce the harms of screening, a routine screening interval of two years or more may be preferred over annual screening in those men who have participated in shared decision-making and decided on screening. As compared to annual screening, it is expected that screening intervals of two years preserve the majority of the benefits and reduce overdiagnosis and false positives.

Guideline Statement 5: The Panel does not recommend routine PSA screening in men age 70+ years or any man with less than a 10 to 15 year life expectancy. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Reading the whole thing is pretty informative. Urologists should try it.

Annual PSAs on everyone from age 40 generate gobs of abnormal results, leading to biopsies galore and of course a plethora of early cancer diagnoses. “We offer watchful waiting,” they say. But once a patient hears the word “cancer,” they stop listening and start screaming, “Get it out!”

See, urologists treat prostate cancer. Find it, cut it out, nuke it, whatever it takes. Never mind that the patient would never have had symptoms from a disease that was never going to kill him. It’s cancer.

But I treat patients, men who end up incontinent and impotent from overzealous treatment by those same urologists who impugn preventive care recommendations because there are no urologists on the panel, but who can’t be bothered to follow their own fundamentally similar specialty guidelines.

Guess what. There are no foxes on the panel developing guidelines for guarding henhouses either.

Lucy Hornstein is a family physician who blogs at Musings of a Dinosaur, and is the author of Declarations of a Dinosaur: 10 Laws I’ve Learned as a Family Doctor.

Prev

We must pay careful attention to the pronouns that we use

November 5, 2013 Kevin 0
…
Next

I felt abandoned by the system to which I had committed my career

November 5, 2013 Kevin 17
…

Tagged as: Oncology/Hematology, Primary Care

Post navigation

< Previous Post
We must pay careful attention to the pronouns that we use
Next Post >
I felt abandoned by the system to which I had committed my career

ADVERTISEMENT

More by Lucy Hornstein, MD

  • After #MeToo, have the rules changed?

    Lucy Hornstein, MD
  • A patient’s view on cancer surprises this physician

    Lucy Hornstein, MD
  • Never underestimate the power of pus

    Lucy Hornstein, MD

Related Posts

  • When breast cancer screening guidelines conflict: Some patients face real consequences

    Leda Dederich
  • Hormone replacement therapy is still linked to cancer

    Martha Rosenberg
  • We have a shot at preventing cervical cancer

    Lisa N. Abaid, MD, MPH
  • Obstruction of medical justice: How health care fails patients with cancer

    Miriam A. Knoll, MD
  • Despite progress in cancer care, cost and equity challenges still must be addressed

    David M. Aboulafia, MD
  • Using the Avengers to explain how cancer treatments work

    Jennifer Lycette, MD

More in Conditions

  • The cost of ignoring pharmacist clinical judgment in health care

    Muhammad Abdullah Khan
  • 10,000 steps before lunch: How a retired doctor models prevention

    Gerald Kuo
  • How a pregnancy test on a male patient revealed health care flaws

    Eric Goldfarb
  • Beyond burnout: the rise of the optimized, dissociated executive

    Jenny Shields, PhD
  • How fNIRS and light therapy are shaping precision psychiatry

    Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD
  • The emotional labor of volunteering in an aging society

    Gerald Kuo
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Will AI replace primary care physicians?

      P. Dileep Kumar, MD, MBA | Tech
    • Why the U.S. health care system is failing patients and physicians

      John C. Hagan III, MD | Policy
    • Putting health back into insurance: the case for tobacco cessation

      Edward Anselm, MD | Policy
    • What is the minority tax in medicine?

      Tharini Nagarkar and Maranda C. Ward, EdD, MPH | Education
    • Why every physician needs a sabbatical (and how to take one)

      Christie Mulholland, MD | Physician
    • Retail health care vs. employer DPC: Preparing for 2026 policy shifts

      Dana Y. Lujan, MBA | Policy
  • Past 6 Months

    • Why patient trust in physicians is declining

      Mansi Kotwal, MD, MPH | Physician
    • How environmental justice and health disparities connect to climate change

      Kaitlynn Esemaya, Alexis Thompson, Annique McLune, and Anamaria Ancheta | Policy
    • Will AI replace primary care physicians?

      P. Dileep Kumar, MD, MBA | Tech
    • A physician father on the Dobbs decision and reproductive rights

      Travis Walker, MD, MPH | Physician
    • The blind men and the elephant: a parable for modern pain management

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Conditions
    • Is tramadol really ineffective and risky?

      John A. Bumpus, PhD | Meds
  • Recent Posts

    • A 6-step framework for new health care leaders

      All Levels Leadership | Physician
    • The cost of ignoring pharmacist clinical judgment in health care

      Muhammad Abdullah Khan | Conditions
    • 10,000 steps before lunch: How a retired doctor models prevention

      Gerald Kuo | Conditions
    • Why health advocacy needs foresight and backcasting tools

      Dr. Lind Grant-Oyeye | Physician
    • Genetic testing requires more than just a binary result [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • How a pregnancy test on a male patient revealed health care flaws

      Eric Goldfarb | Conditions

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 6 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Will AI replace primary care physicians?

      P. Dileep Kumar, MD, MBA | Tech
    • Why the U.S. health care system is failing patients and physicians

      John C. Hagan III, MD | Policy
    • Putting health back into insurance: the case for tobacco cessation

      Edward Anselm, MD | Policy
    • What is the minority tax in medicine?

      Tharini Nagarkar and Maranda C. Ward, EdD, MPH | Education
    • Why every physician needs a sabbatical (and how to take one)

      Christie Mulholland, MD | Physician
    • Retail health care vs. employer DPC: Preparing for 2026 policy shifts

      Dana Y. Lujan, MBA | Policy
  • Past 6 Months

    • Why patient trust in physicians is declining

      Mansi Kotwal, MD, MPH | Physician
    • How environmental justice and health disparities connect to climate change

      Kaitlynn Esemaya, Alexis Thompson, Annique McLune, and Anamaria Ancheta | Policy
    • Will AI replace primary care physicians?

      P. Dileep Kumar, MD, MBA | Tech
    • A physician father on the Dobbs decision and reproductive rights

      Travis Walker, MD, MPH | Physician
    • The blind men and the elephant: a parable for modern pain management

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Conditions
    • Is tramadol really ineffective and risky?

      John A. Bumpus, PhD | Meds
  • Recent Posts

    • A 6-step framework for new health care leaders

      All Levels Leadership | Physician
    • The cost of ignoring pharmacist clinical judgment in health care

      Muhammad Abdullah Khan | Conditions
    • 10,000 steps before lunch: How a retired doctor models prevention

      Gerald Kuo | Conditions
    • Why health advocacy needs foresight and backcasting tools

      Dr. Lind Grant-Oyeye | Physician
    • Genetic testing requires more than just a binary result [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • How a pregnancy test on a male patient revealed health care flaws

      Eric Goldfarb | Conditions

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

A urologist’s hypocrisy on prostate cancer screening
6 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...