Antidote: the Prostate Specific Antigen

Share this article:
Marc Siegel, MD
Marc Siegel, MD

I have focused almost exclusively in this column on wrongful attacks on useful treatments by a headline-hungry news media. This time I want to focus on a simple test, the Prostate Specific Antigen. It has been the gateway for diagnostics and treatments of prostate cancer for nearly two decades but is now under attack.

Without the research to back it up, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has decided that the PSA should not be routinely used to screen healthy men for prostate cancer. Many doctors and professional societies, including the American Cancer Society, disagree. The PSA has been studied in large European trials and was found to lower the prostate cancer death rate by more than 30 percent in two studies.

With more than 30,000 deaths per year in the U.S. from prostate cancer (not to mention the pain, fatigue, etc. for those with metastatic disease), the PSA has caused this number to diminish even as the incidence of the disease increases.

Screening tests which analyze proteins are on the horizon. So are better imaging studies that may make blind biopsies unnecessary. For now, the PSA is the best we have. If you have prostate cancer there is a very good chance it will be elevated.

Weighing risks and benefits, the art of medicine involves knowing what to do if the PSA is elevated— whether or not to biopsy, whether or not to remove a cancer. The art of medicine is based on knowing. Healers are not head-in-the-sand ostriches. The task force and the media are doing us a big disservice by bashing the PSA. It is one of our best screening tools.

Marc Siegel MD is medical director of Doctor Radio at NYU Langone Medical Center. He is author of The Inner Pulse; Unlocking the Secret Code of Sickness and Health
Share this article:
You must be a registered member of MMM to post a comment.

Email Newsletters

MM&M EBOOK: PATIENT ACCESS

Patient access to pharmaceuticals is a tale of two worlds—affordability has improved for the majority, while the minority is hampered by cost, distribution and red tape. To provide marketers with a well-rounded perspective, MM&M presents this e-book chock full of key insights. Click here to access it.

More in Features

Read the complete September 2014 Digital Edition

Read the complete September 2014 Digital Edition

Click the above link to access the complete Digital Edition of the August 2014 issue of MM&M, with all text, charts and pictures.

Medical marketing needs mainstream Mad Men

Medical marketing needs mainstream Mad Men

Agencies must generate emotional resonance with the target audience, not unlike Apple, Pepsi or Nike

Are discounts cutting out co-pays?

GSK's decision to cut Advair's price spurred some PBMs to put it back on formulary. Will drugmaker discounts diminish the need for loyalty programs? How can these programs stay relevant beyond giving co-pay assistance?