- Details
- At the CAncer or Not Cancer: Evaluating and Reconsidering GG1 prostate cancer (CANCER-GG1?) Symposium, experts debate the evolving landscape of prostate cancer diagnosis and management. They examine the limitations of traditional biopsy methods and the potential of MRI in improving diagnostic accuracy. The conversation highlights the shift towards imaging-based diagnoses in countries like Australi...
|
- Details
- At the CAncer or Not Cancer: Evaluating and Reconsidering GG1 prostate cancer (CANCER-GG1?) Symposium, Quoc-Dien Trinh discusses the complexities surrounding active surveillance for prostate cancer in racial and ethnic minorities, particularly Black men. He reviews several studies highlighting disparities in outcomes, including higher rates of disease reclassification and adverse pathology in Blac...
|
- Details
- At the CAncer or Not Cancer: Evaluating and Reconsidering GG1 prostate cancer (CANCER-GG1?) Symposium, experts debate the disparities in prostate cancer outcomes among different racial groups, particularly focusing on African American men. They challenge previous findings, noting that several studies have failed to replicate significant differences in progression rates when access to care is equal...
|
- Details
- At the CAncer or Not Cancer: Evaluating and Reconsidering GG1 prostate cancer (CANCER-GG1?) Symposium, Howard Wolinsky, a medical journalist and prostate cancer patient, shares his experience with active surveillance (AS) and presents findings from a survey of over 450 AS patients. He discusses the financial and emotional challenges faced by low-risk patients, including difficulties obtaining life...
|
- Details
- At the CAncer or Not Cancer: Evaluating and Reconsidering GG1 prostate cancer (CANCER-GG1?) Symposium, Leszek Izdebski discusses the complex decision-making process for prostate cancer patients considering active surveillance (AS). He emphasizes the importance of quality of life considerations, noting that different patients have varying priorities, such as maintaining the ability to participate i...
|
- Details
- At the CAncer or Not Cancer: Evaluating and Reconsidering GG1 prostate cancer (CANCER-GG1?) Symposium, Ingrid Hall discusses the CDC's involvement in active surveillance for localized prostate cancer. She highlights the 2011 State-of-the-Science Conference and subsequent research initiatives aimed at addressing gaps identified by the consensus panel, and emphasizes the CDC's commitment to supporti...
|
- Details
- At the CAncer or Not Cancer: Evaluating and Reconsidering GG1 prostate cancer (CANCER-GG1?) Symposium, Timothy Wilt discusses the potential impact of changing prostate cancer nomenclature on screening guidelines. Dr. Wilt notes that current screening rates remain high despite limited net benefit. He suggests that changes in clinical practice guidelines may be driven more by advocacy than science....
|
- Details
- At the CAncer or Not Cancer: Evaluating and Reconsidering GG1 prostate cancer (CANCER-GG1?) Symposium, Hashim Ahmed discusses the UK's approach to prostate cancer diagnosis using MRI-based screening. Dr. Ahmed presents data showing that combining MRI with PSA density can significantly reduce unnecessary biopsies, particularly for PIRADS 1, 2, and low PSA density PIRADS 3 cases. He proposes an inte...
|
- Details
- At the CAncer or Not Cancer: Evaluating and Reconsidering GG1 prostate cancer (CANCER-GG1?) Symposium, experts explore various aspects of prostate cancer screening, diagnosis, and management. They compare approaches in the UK and US, noting differences in screening practices and attitudes towards low-grade cancers. The discussion concludes with a debate about the histopathological criteria for dia...
|
- Details
- At the CAncer or Not Cancer: Evaluating and Reconsidering GG1 prostate cancer (CANCER-GG1?) Symposium, experts debate the effectiveness of biomarkers in distinguishing between different grades of prostate cancer, particularly in active surveillance cohorts. The conversation highlights the difficulty in identifying the small percentage of high-risk patients within low-risk cohorts. The discussion c...
|
