How not to develop a medical intervention: Learning from the prostate screening debacle

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on email
Share on print

This week, the USPSTF issued its draft guidelines for prostate cancer screening. They propose shifting from task force’s recommendation against routine prostate cancer screening to a recommendation for informed and shared decision-making in which the physician and patient discuss the real risks of harm and the potential for life saving benefit before deciding on screening.

To access this subscriber-only content please log in or subscribe.

If your institution has a site license, log in with IP-login or register for a sponsored account.*
*Not all site licenses are enrolled in sponsored accounts.

Login Subscribe

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

The long-awaited results from the RASolute 302 trial—a phase III clinical trial evaluating daraxonrasib, a RAS inhibitor, for the treatment of patients with previously treated, metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma—have been read out. 
At a lecture at Yale Cancer Center recently, Robert A. Winn brandished a copy of a 32-year old booklet titled “Cancer at a Crossroads: A Report to Congress for the Nation,” using it as a show-and-tell prop in arguing that America’s cancer program is once again at a crossroads and therefore in urgent need of strategic thinking (The Cancer Letter, April 10, 2026).
Otis W. Brawley, MD, MACP
Chief medical officer, American Cancer Society

Never miss an issue!

Get alerts for our award-winning coverage in your inbox.

Login