This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

William J. Catalona, MD
Washington University School of Medicine St Louis, Mo

JAMA. 1995;274(20):1587.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—In Dr Eisenberg's¹ article challenging the current emphasis on technological advances in medicine and cost containment, his limited presentation of the controversy on screening and treatment for prostate cancer as an example lacks balance and does not accurately reflect the current literature.

Eisenberg incorrectly implies that screening for prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing detects latent cancers and that patients are being subjected to unnecessary surgery. This concern is not borne out: about 90% of PSA-detected cancers have histological features of cancers that would be expected to progress during the patients' lifetimes.²

Eisenberg cites studies^3,4 claiming that screening for prostate cancer may cause more harm than good; however, these studies contain outdated, nonrepresentative data. By basing his analysis solely on these studies, Eisenberg underestimates the lethal potential of prostate cancer and perpetuates the erroneous assumptions, questionable utilities, and flawed data included in these . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?