Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[sulaco]

KT, one out of four PSA tests showing cancer means that 750,000 men who have an abnormal PSA are in danger of being unnecessarily treated with often serious side effects, while 250,000 men are diagnosed with cancer that may or may not be treated, depending on their age, or who may have been diagnosed another way, such as DRE.

The PSA is a screening test, and not a very good one.

One out of every 6-7 tests is a false NEGATIVE. You stated these were rare, and that is flat out wrong. 15% of men with outright prostate cancer have a NORMAL PSA.

Check it:

15% of prostate cancer men have normal PSA

Can some men benefit from the test? Absolutely. The men above with prostate cancer and a normal PSA could benefit from SERIAL checks of PSA (which is therefore more of a monitoring test, than a screening test), African-American men, young men with severe urinary symptoms, or other lower urinary tract symtoms, unexpected ED, strong family history, and abnormal prostate DRE, are all good examples.

Did you know that PSA naturally rises in all men as they age?
And that men over 75 should not be screened? (they'll die of something else first.)

Screening tests need to be very carefully chosen because they are applied to millions of people. The Pap smear is a very good example of an excellent screening test. It is sensitive, it is specific, and it doesn't have significant harms with its application (other than the discomfort of the Pap smear itself.)

It seems you are committed to the test because it's the best we've got. I can understand that sentiment. However, that offers less consolation to the overdiagnosed, overtreated, and subsequently harmed millions of men. They are left to suffer because of the shortcomings of the screen.

"First do no harm"

Best,

Joe Six