vlog

Object moved to here.

Do Not Wait to Consider Life Expectancy Until After a Prostate Cancer Diagnosis | Reproductive Health | JAMA Internal Medicine | vlog

vlog

[Skip to Navigation]
Sign In
Invited Commentary
Aging and Health
DZ𳾲11, 2024

Do Not Wait to Consider Life Expectancy Until After a Prostate Cancer Diagnosis

Author Affiliations
  • 1Division of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
  • 2Division of Geriatrics, University of California San Francisco and San Francisco VA Health Care System, San Francisco
JAMA Intern Med. Published online November 11, 2024. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2024.6020

Life expectancy is an important consideration that informs the benefits and harms of medical interventions in older adults, especially when the intervention’s benefits are accrued years later. Life expectancy has been incorporated into guidelines for both screening and treatment of prostate cancer. Men with life expectancy of less than 10 years are not recommended to continue prostate cancer screening nor to receive aggressive treatment for low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer. The observational study by Daskivich et al,1 which included 243 928 men in the Veterans Affairs Health System with clinically localized prostate cancer, showed that the rate of prostate cancer overtreatment has actually risen among veterans with limited life expectancy from 2000 to 2019.1 The study defined overtreatment as aggressive treatment (surgery or radiation) in those with life expectancy less than 10 years and low- to intermediate-risk disease and in those with life expectancy less than 5 years and high-risk disease, in accordance with guideline recommendations. The study found that although there was overall reduction of aggressive treatment in men with low-risk prostate cancer in the active surveillance era, the rate of aggressive treatment increased in men with limited life expectancy, by 22% among men with a life expectancy less than 10 years and intermediate-risk disease and by 29% among men with a life expectancy less than 5 years and high-risk disease. Over three-quarters of the overtreatment was radiation therapy.

1 Comment for this article
EXPAND ALL
Undergo PSA test at your own risk, regardless of life expectancy
Takeshi Takehashi, M.D, Ph.D | Health and welfare bureau, ex-urologic surgeon
Overdiagnosis is difficult for patients to understand, and the principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM) are similarly challenging—both for patients and for clinicians.

For example, when evidence shows that screening for colorectal cancer reduces cancer-specific mortality, this does not necessarily lead to a reduction in overall mortality. This is because other causes of death may occur before cancer-related death, particularly in elderly individuals with limited life expectancy—an effect known as overdiagnosis. The assumption here is that the cancer diagnosis is correct, but the observation period is too short to capture potential benefits. In contrast, prostate cancer screening presents a more
complex issue. There is no evidence that screening reduces cancer mortality, even when considering the broader population, not just the elderly. Additionally, given the historical context, it is unclear whether screen-detected prostate cancers are biologically aggressive or will behave like cancer in the long term. Therefore, the term "overdiagnosis" may not be the most accurate description in this case; it would be more appropriate to characterize prostate cancer screening as involving an unjustified or inadequate diagnostic test.

For proponents of prostate cancer screening, practicing EBM is neither straightforward nor clear-cut. According to the USPSTF, there is no evidence of benefit from the best available data. In cases where evidence supports a practice, it should be promoted. But what should clinicians do in the absence of evidence? Should they inform patients that there is no evidence, thereby discouraging hope, or should they refrain from action for those who are not interested in screening? If a medical intervention provides no benefit and causes harm, many countries' laws would classify it as malpractice. Performing such an intervention without proper consent could also be considered criminal. Therefore, prostate cancer screening should not be universally recommended across all age groups, regardless of life expectancy. The USPSTF's statement, ”Clinicians should not screen men who do not express a preference for screening” is consistent with this stance.

The USPSTF also mandates that clinicians and patients engage in shared decision-making, considering the benefits and harms of prostate cancer screening before PSA testing. This is a key element of evidence-based practice. First of all, clinicians must be able to organize and interpret the evidence for themselves. More precisely, that there is no evidence about the benefits. They are to undergo PSA test at their own risk, regardless of life expectancy. Guidelines issued by urologists and related organizations suggest that this initial step has not yet been adequately achieved.

REFERENCE

Takahashi T. Observational study on screen-detected prostate cancer: case series of empirical clinical practice. BJU Int. 2024 Aug 29. doi: 10.1111/bju.16525.

Takahashi T. The first step in shared decision-making for prostate cancer screening. BJU Int. 2024 Nov 6. doi: 10.1111/bju.16580.

Takahashi T. Two conflicting guidelines on prostate specific antigen screening in Japan. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2023 Mar 7;53(3):280-283. doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyac192.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
READ MORE
×