Well, Jim,
48 respondents at this point. I don't think it would change much if more people voted. 25%, or one in four patients are good with the AUA Screening Guidelines. A demographic breakdown isn't possible but I would tend to agree with Dude that the younger 35-45yo guys at dx would probably disagree with these guidelines. Myself being the exception. But I would also bet that same age group that has no family history would by majority never ask to get tested.
Interestingly, with the age group of 40-45yo men with family history, The new guidelines don't change a thing. These men are still stratified to consult with their physician and can be screened in precisely the same way the old guidelines states. The new guidelines do not include 35-39yo men with risk factors and that would be the major change there. The incidence at that age is so low that it barely registers a blip in the prostate cancer statistics at the SEER website.
seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/prost.html#incidence-mortalityTo save a man at that age group with prostate cancer screening is very unlikely. I'm sure that exceptions exist but there is no science to prove that screening men in that age group has any affect at all on prostate cancer specific mortality.
One point I would like to bring out. Your poll does not ask "I have read the new AUA Guidelines in it's entirety" and I believe by looking at many responses in this and the other related threads that more than half did NOT read the paper or at least did not understand the paper. Such comments indicating "a 70yo man with symptoms of PCa" or even tone that indicates that the poster thinks what the AUA guidelines would have prevented their own cases from detection, indicate they did not read or understand what they read. Unless you are high risk man, not yet at age 40 when you were detected, there is language all over this document that can make you inclusive in the testing. If a man does not know his risks, as someone also rightly stated happens, he can always error on the side of caution and still be screened. And if you are a man that does not know his risks, such as adopted, and he is concerned about
acquiring ANY genetic ailment, he faces these challenges in all ailment screenings. He again can error on the side of caution and tell his doctor he'd like to be screened anyway.
Lastly, there is a high number of men here that feel after they have been diagnoses that the only prudent thing to do is screen every man annually starting at age 40. I'd be curious of that poll result. Statistically men by the age of 40 that have been screened is about
10% I read statistically.
Attached chart gives us a reality check on the harms of screening. 23% of every 1000 men screened will in fact suffer from morbidity rating from slight, to more commonly moderate to severe side effects. The ERSPC data show us that zero to one man will be saved in that group of 1000.
www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/detection/psa-infographic.htmlThanks for doing this poll. I actually gained some knowledge out of it. I will no longer comment on it at this time as it has been well discussed. We'll see that topic again in the future and I'll be curious to run such a poll again after this has time to sink in.
Thanks again..
Tony