Design: Accuracy audit of all news on prostate cancer broadcast on Sydney footprint free-to-air television stations between 2 May 2005 and 18 December 2006 (42 items), and published in print media from 6 February 2003 to 31 December 2006 in Australian capital cities (388 items). These contained 436 direct or attributed statements.
Results: Of the 436 statements analysed, 44 (10%) were factually inaccurate or made claims not supported by the scientific literature or most cancer control agencies. Misleading statements about prostate screening and its sequelae were found in five categories: mortality from prostate cancer; expert agency support for screening; the efficacy of screening in preventing death from prostate cancer and the importance of early detection; the accuracy of the prostate-specific antigen test; and prevalence and severity of adverse effects from treatment.
Conclusions: Despite near universal lack of support for prostate cancer screening of asymptomatic men by leading international and Australian cancer control agencies, Australians are exposed to an unbalanced stream of encouragement to seek testing. This coverage includes inaccurate information which ignores scientific evidence and the general lack of expert agency support.
- 1. Ilic D, O’Connor D, Green S, et al. Screening for prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; (3): CD004720.
- 2. International Union Against Cancer. 3.7 Screening. In: Evidence-based cancer prevention: strategies for NGOs. A UICC handbook for Europe. Geneva: UICC, 2004. http://www. uicc.org/fileadmin/manual/9.7screening.pdf (accessed Jun 2007).
- 3. US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer. Rockville, Md: USPSTF, 2002. http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstf/uspsprca.htm (accessed Jun 2007).
- 4. United Kingdom National Health Service. National Screening Committee policy — prostate cancer screening. July 2006. http://www.library.nhs.uk/screening/ViewResource.aspx?resID=61153&tabID=288 (accessed Jun 2007).
- 5. Australian Prostate Cancer Collaboration Inc [website]. http://www.auspcc.org.au/ (accessed Jun 2007).
- 6. The Cancer Council Australia. Prostate cancer screening position statement. Sydney: Cancer Council Australia, 2005. http://www.cancer.org.au/documents/Pos_State_Prostate_cancer_screening_MAY2005.pdf (accessed Jun 2007).
- 7. American Cancer Society. Guidelines for the early detection of cancer. Atlanta: ACS, 2007. http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_2_3X_ACS_Cancer_Detection_Guide lines_36.asp (accessed Jun 2007).
- 8. MacKenzie R, Chapman S, Holding S, McGeechan K. “A matter of faith, not science”: discourse on prostate cancer screening in Australian news media 2003–2006. J R Soc Med 2007. In press.
- 9. Chapman S, MacKenzie R. The Australian Health News Research Collaboration [letter]. Med J Aust 2007; 186: 326. <MJA full text>
- 10. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Australia’s health 2006. Canberra: AIHW, 2006. (AIHW Cat. No. AUS 73.) http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/aus/ah06/ (accessed Jul 2007).
- 11. Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand. PSA testing for prostate cancer. http://www.usanz.org.au/consumer_health/index.jsp?a=1126157272 (accessed Jun 2007).
- 12. Thompson IM, Ankherst DP, Chi C, et al. Operating characteristics of prostate-specific antigen in men with an initial PSA level of 3.0 ng/mL or lower. JAMA 2005; 294: 66-70.
- 13. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, et al. Likelihood ratios for modern screening mammography: risk of breast cancer based on age and mammographic interpretation. JAMA 1996; 276: 39-43.
- 14. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. BreastScreen Australia monitoring report 2000–2001. (AIHW Cancer Series No. 25). Canberra: AIHW, 2003: Tables 30 and 32. (AIHW Cat. No. CAN 20.) http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/index.cfm/title/9731 (accessed Jul 2007).
- 15. Harris R, Lohr KN. Screening for prostate cancer: an update of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002; 137: 917-929.
- 16. Morrison AS. Screening in chronic disease. Monographs in epidemiology and biostatistics. Vol. 19. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.
- 17. Barratt A, Irwig L, Glasziou P, et al. Users’ guides to the medical literature: XVII. How to use guidelines and recommendations about screening. JAMA 1999; 281: 2029-2034.
- 18. Draisma G, Boer R, Otto SJ, et al. Lead times and overdetection due to prostate-specific antigen screening: estimates from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95: 868-878.
- 19. McDavid K, Melnik TA, Derderian H. Prostate cancer screening trends of New York State men at least 50 years of age, 1994 to 1997. Prev Med 2000; 31: 195-202.
- 20. Threlfall TJ, English DR, Rouse IL. Prostate cancer in Western Australia: trends in incidence and mortality from 1985 to 1996. Med J Aust 1998; 169: 21-24. <MJA full text>
- 21. McCaul KA, Luke CG, Roder DM. Trends in prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates in South Australia, 1977–1993. Med J Aust 1995; 162: 520-522.
- 22. Smith DP, Armstrong BK. Prostate-specific antigen testing in Australia and association with prostate cancer incidence in New South Wales. Med J Aust 1998; 169: 17-20. <MJA full text>
- 23. Vis AN. Does PSA screening reduce prostate cancer mortality [commentary]? CMAJ 2002; 166: 600-601.
- 24. Oliver SE, Gunnel D, Donovan JL. Comparison of trends in prostate-cancer mortality in England and Wales and the USA. Erratum in: Lancet 2000; 356: 1278. Lancet 2000; 355: 1788-1789.
- 25. Perron L, Moore L, Bairati I, et al. PSA screening and prostate cancer mortality. CMAJ 2002; 166: 586-591.
- 26. Holmberg L, Bill-Axelson A, Helgesen F, et al. A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 781-789.
- 27. Potosky AL, Davis WW, Hoffman RM. Five-year outcomes after prostatectomy or radiotherapy for prostate cancer: the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96: 1358-1367.
- 28. da Vinci prostatectomy.com [website]. Hospitals and doctors. http://www.davinciprostatectomy.com/hosp_results.aspx?searchstring=Australia (accessed Jul 2007).
- 29. Patel VR, Chammas Jr MF, Shah S. Robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a review of the current state of affairs. Int J Clin Pract 2007; 61: 309-314.
- 30. Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Teber D, et al. Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy — critical analysis of the results. Eur Urol 2006; 49: 612-624.
- 31. Maddern GJ. Robotic surgery: will it be evidence-based or just “toys for boys” [editorial]? Med J Aust 2007; 186: 221-222. <MJA full text>
- 32. McCammon K, Kolm P, Main B. Comparative quality-of-life analysis after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation for localized prostate cancer. Urology 1999; 54: 509-516.
- 33. Steineck G, Helgesen F, Adolfsson J, et al. Quality of life after radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 790-796.
- 34. Trevena LJ, Davey HM, Barratt A, et al. A systematic review on communicating with patients about evidence. J Eval Clin Pract 2006; 12: 13-23.
Publication of your online response is subject to the Medical Journal of Australia's editorial discretion. You will be notified by email within five working days should your response be accepted.