Prostate Cancer: A Case Study

Today, prostate cancer is usually detected through screening, and there are two methods for early detection. The prostate-specific antigen test (PSA) is used, but there are

In the case for PSA screening, PCa is the leading internal malignancy in US men and the second leading cause of cancer death in American men. Early detection of prostate cancers offers the best chance of cure. The PSA blood test is the best chance of cure. Currently, the PSA blood test is the best currently available way to detect PCa and it is easy, safe and inexpensive. PSA test results is a piece of information, it is what doctors do with the information that becomes the issue. However, the great majority of PSA detected tumors have the histologic characteristics of clinically important cancers. Also, PSA detection has found tumors early advancing the diagnosis by Seeral years (5-13) and prostate cancer mortality rates in U.S have decreased by 4% (patho book) since 1992, which is 5 years after initiation of prostate screenings. The dilemma is over treating the clinically unimportant disease versus under

There are multiple methods for screening for Prostate Cancer; the most common is Digital Rectal Examination. During a digital rectal exam a doctor inserts a glove, lubricated finger into the rectum to feel for any irregular or abnormal firm area in the prostate gland.

The carrier has denied coverage of Oncotype DX Colon Cancer Assay as experimental and/or investigational and not medically necessary. There is a letter from the carrier to Genomic Health Inc., dated 06/28/2016 which states:

Each year approximately 233,000 men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer (Eggener, Cifu, & Nabhan, 2015). In 2015, prostate cancer was the second most common cancer related cause of death among United States men (Eggener, et. al., 2015). While the majority of prostate cancers are slow growing with a 5-year survival rate of approximately 98%, statistics show that when prostate cancer is identified as metastatic, the 5-year survival rate dramatically drops down to 20-25% (Eggener, et. al., 2015). According to these numbers alone, it appears screening for prostate cancer would be a well-accepted practice. However, current methods of screening for this cancer are controversial and has lead organizations like the U.S Preventative Service Task Force (USPSTF) and the American Cancer Society (ACS) to different guidelines for screening.

The paper Prostate Cancer Screening is written as an analysis of the controversy on the use of screening for prostate cancer. The paper itself is written between doctors Elie Mulhem, Nikolaus Fulbright, and Norah Duncan. The analysis, while likely directed to those in the medical field, is tailored to be easily understood by laypeople. While the paper itself is a somewhat brief, surface level analysis of the situation, it does support the notion that prostate cancer screening through methods like prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and digital-rectal examinations (DRE) have questionable effectiveness. The intention of the paper appears to persuade doctors and the public to the viewpoint that prostate

Benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate cancer share a few similarities, elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Along with enlargement of prostate gland that causes urinary symptoms such as, frequent urination, hesitancy, dribbling, and frequent nighttime urination. However, they are quite different which is why more tests need to be done to confirm one or the other condition. These two diseases are also similar in the fact that they both cause an enlargement of the prostate. However with BPH the central portion of the prostate is enlarged and with prostate cancer more commonly the lateral lobes or side of the prostate are enlarged, but can affect any were on the prostate. Both can even be detected by a digital rectal exam however

A digital rectal exam is completed yearly to establish prostate location, size, and the presence of nodules. (ACS, 2011)

We recommend in later studies to use larger samples and compare the DWI ADC results to post-prostatectomy pathological results so we can correlate the results to accurate Gleason score and even detect central gland carcinoma pathologically to compare with DWI MRI results.

Prostate cancer is the second most common type of cancer diagnosed in men around the world today. Despite years of research, little is known as to the exact cause of prostate cancer, making it an area of intense research in medicine today. The pathology of prostate cancer has yielded important information on prevention, diagnosis and treatment methods. It has been understood that diet has much to do with tumour growth, and new research into nutrition is revealing new strategies in prostate cancer prevention. Genetics also play an important factor and must be taken into consideration. A number of new treatments for prostate cancer have been successfully implemented. Since prostate cancer is most common in men 50 and older, it is for the

The carrier has denied coverage of Olipaub (Lynparza) as experimental and/or investigational and not medically necessary. There is a letter from the carrier to the member dated 04/12/2016, which states in part:

PSA levels are found increased in these conditions, as the tissue barrier is disrupted between the prostate gland lumen and the capillaries. PSA screening has limited accuracy, which can lead to over diagnosis of the disease, performance of unnecessary diagnostic testing and treatment. Therefore, many men with false positive PSA screening, who have no cancer, are subjected to invasive procedures such as prostate biopsies, radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy. Biopsies not only cause discomfort to the patient, but have other risks such as infections, hematuria, prostatitis, sepsis, endocarditis, cystitis, hypotension and urinary symptoms. The pros and cons of PSA testing should be informed to patient before performing the test. For these reasons, professional organizations, including the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), American Cancer Society (ACS), and American Urology Association (AUA), have issued clinical practice guidelines recommending that clinicians inform patients about the pros, cons, and uncertainties of PSA screening, and that screening decisions be based on patient preferences (Han

The most accurate way to detect cancer cells inside the prostate gland is the surgical removal and histopathological examination of the entire gland. As this approach is clinically inapplicable to each patient with suspicious findings, Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostatic biopsy is considered the standard diagnostic procedure for the detection of prostate cancer for patients with a high suspicion for prostate cancer 1.

Cancer biology can be defined as the ‘study of irregularities and incontrollable growth of individual cells, tissue or organ in any organisms’ thus prostate cancer as one form. In addition to this I also feel there are other disciplines seeing within this research, such as structural biology (shape and organization of biological macromolecules) and endocrinology (glands and hormones), relevant when discussing PSA testing. The discipline of cell biology (e.g. study of cell life) and

Hypothesis/Objective: Prostate molecular markers have been first discovered using the cancer genome of individuals other than African American decent. Due to the lack of screening in a large cohort of AA PCa the prevalence of these markers in AA PCa is not known. Given the fundamental differences in the ancestral history of the genome of AA and EA the prevalence of these molecular markers may be markedly different. Conventional systematic sampling approaches may not reveal the true prevalence in AA PCa. Therefore, we propose to undertake an innovative approach using whole-mount radical prostatectomy to understand the racial disparity.