Men who get a "false-positive" prostate cancer result
-- an abnormal screening test followed by a biopsy
indicating no evidence of cancer -- appear more likely
to worry about their subsequent risk of cancer and
report more problems with sexual function compared to
men with normal screening results, according to a
University of Iowa study.
The study findings, based on telephone surveys of 210
men, appear in the February online issue of the
journal Urology. Prostate cancer is the most common
non-skin malignancy diagnosed in men in the United
States. The majority of men in the United States are
screened beginning at age 50 with the
prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test.
"This study emphasizes the importance of doctors'
discussing the pros and cons of prostate cancer
screening with patients," said the study's lead author
David Katz, M.D., associate professor of internal
medicine in the UI Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver
College of Medicine, and of epidemiology in the UI
College of Public Health.
"Because screening affects a large number of men
relative to those who are expected to benefit from
treatment, even a small adverse effect of apparently
false-positive results on cancer-related worry and
quality of life could have a substantial impact on
public health," said Katz, who also is a staff
physician and researcher with the Department of
Veterans Affairs Iowa City Health Care System and its
Center for Research in the Implementation of
Innovative Strategies and Practices.
The study team interviewed 101 men who had normal PSA
levels and 109 men who had an abnormal PSA reading or
abnormal digital rectal examination, but whose biopsy
for prostate cancer then was negative.
Men with false-positives were about three times as
likely to report being at least somewhat worried about
getting prostate cancer and nearly twice as likely to
report being bothered by their sexual function.
Katz said that the increased problems with sexual
function reported by men with false-positives could be
a residual effect of the biopsy, which can cause
short-term pain or other side effects, or it could be
an effect from worry about the possibility of still
having cancer. "This finding warrants further
investigation," he said.
"Men's perceptions following a false-positive prostate
screening test are parallel to those of women who have
an abnormal mammography exam but whose follow-up
biopsy shows no breast cancer," Katz said. "It's
understandable that false-positive prostate exams
could affect men's outlook on their health."
As with other prostate cancer screening studies, the
UI-led study raises the question whether men without
any prostate cancer symptoms should receive PSA
testing.
Katz said that given the lack of definitive evidence
that PSA screening saves lives in asymptomatic men,
deciding whether to have a PSA screening test needs to
be an individualized decision that considers the
patient's current health status and risk factors, such
as being African-American and/or having a family
history of the disease.
"Men can discuss the pros and cons of getting a PSA
test with their doctors. However, once a man decides
to go ahead and get a PSA test, if its results are
abnormal, he typically should have ongoing follow-up
and surveillance for prostate cancer," Katz said.
Katz said that a strength of the UI study was that it
did not rely on volunteers. "Volunteers who sign up
for a prostate cancer screening study represent a
different type of population than that comprised by
the individuals in our study, who were patients seen
in the usual course of care," he said.
However, Katz noted, a limitation of the study is that
the researchers were not able to obtain baseline data
on how the men originally felt about their health
prior to screening. In addition, the study focused
primarily on Caucasian men.
The study was funded in part by a Preventive Oncology
Academic Award from the National Cancer Institute,
with supplemental support from the University of
Wisconsin Comprehensive Cancer Center.
Katz also is a member of the Holden Comprehensive
Cancer Center at the UI. In addition to Katz, the
study involved researchers from the University of
Wisconsin, Indiana University, and Veterans Affairs
Health Services Research and Development in
Indianapolis.