PSA screening for prostate cancer in the United States: 30 years of controversy.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Public Health Policy Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-02 DOI:10.1057/s41271-024-00502-4
Loukas A Georgiou, Brent E Scarbrough
{"title":"PSA screening for prostate cancer in the United States: 30 years of controversy.","authors":"Loukas A Georgiou, Brent E Scarbrough","doi":"10.1057/s41271-024-00502-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 1994, the United States approved the Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) test as a screening tool for prostate cancer. It did so despite the test's inherent weakness: not being prostate cancer specific. Subsequent randomized trials yielded conflicting results as to its benefits. Medical guideline organizations are concerned that PSA screening results in the diagnosis and treatment of clinically indolent prostate cancer. Nevertheless, PSA screening is prevalent in North America and Europe with PSA screening increasing in other regions. We provide a critical review of the major factors that led to the prevalence of PSA screening in the United States despite the debate about its benefits. Public advocacy in favor of the test and failure of the medical community to appreciate its inherent weakness led to widespread adoption. These factors persist today. Other countries need to carefully analyze the utility of the PSA test before adopting it.</p>","PeriodicalId":50070,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Health Policy","volume":" ","pages":"552-561"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-024-00502-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1994, the United States approved the Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) test as a screening tool for prostate cancer. It did so despite the test's inherent weakness: not being prostate cancer specific. Subsequent randomized trials yielded conflicting results as to its benefits. Medical guideline organizations are concerned that PSA screening results in the diagnosis and treatment of clinically indolent prostate cancer. Nevertheless, PSA screening is prevalent in North America and Europe with PSA screening increasing in other regions. We provide a critical review of the major factors that led to the prevalence of PSA screening in the United States despite the debate about its benefits. Public advocacy in favor of the test and failure of the medical community to appreciate its inherent weakness led to widespread adoption. These factors persist today. Other countries need to carefully analyze the utility of the PSA test before adopting it.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国前列腺癌 PSA 筛查:30 年的争议。
1994 年,美国批准将前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)检测作为前列腺癌的筛查工具。尽管这种检测方法有其固有的弱点:对前列腺癌没有特异性。随后进行的随机试验对其益处得出了相互矛盾的结果。医疗指南组织担心 PSA 筛查会导致诊断和治疗临床症状不明显的前列腺癌。然而,PSA 筛查在北美和欧洲非常普遍,在其他地区也在增加。我们对导致 PSA 筛查在美国盛行的主要因素进行了批判性回顾,尽管对其益处存在争议。支持该检查的公众宣传以及医学界未能认识到其固有的弱点导致了该检查的广泛采用。这些因素如今依然存在。其他国家在采用 PSA 检查之前,需要仔细分析其效用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Public Health Policy
Journal of Public Health Policy 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
2.60%
发文量
62
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Public Health Policy (JPHP) will continue its 35 year tradition: an accessible source of scholarly articles on the epidemiologic and social foundations of public health policy, rigorously edited, and progressive. JPHP aims to create a more inclusive public health policy dialogue, within nations and among them. It broadens public health policy debates beyond the ''health system'' to examine all forces and environments that impinge on the health of populations. It provides an exciting platform for airing controversy and framing policy debates - honing policies to solve new problems and unresolved old ones. JPHP welcomes unsolicited original scientific and policy contributions on all public health topics. New authors are particularly encouraged to enter debates about how to improve the health of populations and reduce health disparities.
期刊最新文献
COVID-19, migrants, and world large urban areas: a thematic policy brief. Global Public Health Association policies related to women, children and youth. Caregiver policies in the United States: a systematic review. COVID-19, social determinants, and African American-White disparities: policy response and pathways forward. State adoption of paid sick leave and cardiovascular disease mortality among adults in the United States, 2008-2019.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1