OBJECTIVES: False-positive screening tests may induce persistent psychological distress. This study was designed to determine whether a positive screening test with negative biopsy findings for prostate cancer is associated with worsened mental health during short-term follow-up. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional telephone survey of two groups of men approximately 2 months after testing: group 1, 109 men with an abnormal prostate-specific antigen level or digital rectal examination findings but with negative biopsy findings for prostate cancer; and group 2, 101 age-matched primary care patients with PSA screening levels in the reference range (less than 4 ng/mL). Primary outcomes included state anxiety and prostate cancer-related worry. Secondary outcomes included Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-item Health Survey subscales and sexual function items. Multivariate regression techniques were used to adjust for differences in baseline covariates. RESULTS: Group 1 patients were more worried than group 2 patients about getting prostate cancer (mean worry 3.9 versus 4.5, P = 0.0001, using a 5-point scale, with 1 indicating extreme worry and 5 no worry). Group 1 patients also perceived their risk of prostate cancer to be significantly greater than that of controls (P = 0.001). No significant differences were found across state anxiety or Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-item Health Survey subscales. Sexual bother was greater for group 1 patients, with 19% reporting that sexual function was a moderate to big problem compared with 10% of group 2 patients (P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Men with abnormal prostate cancer screening tests report increased cancer-related worry and more problems with sexual function, despite having a negative biopsy result. Effective counseling interventions are needed before prostate cancer screening and during follow-up.
OBJECTIVES: False-positive screening tests may induce persistent psychological distress. This study was designed to determine whether a positive screening test with negative biopsy findings for prostate cancer is associated with worsened mental health during short-term follow-up. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional telephone survey of two groups of men approximately 2 months after testing: group 1, 109 men with an abnormal prostate-specific antigen level or digital rectal examination findings but with negative biopsy findings for prostate cancer; and group 2, 101 age-matched primary care patients with PSA screening levels in the reference range (less than 4 ng/mL). Primary outcomes included state anxiety and prostate cancer-related worry. Secondary outcomes included Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-item Health Survey subscales and sexual function items. Multivariate regression techniques were used to adjust for differences in baseline covariates. RESULTS: Group 1 patients were more worried than group 2 patients about getting prostate cancer (mean worry 3.9 versus 4.5, P = 0.0001, using a 5-point scale, with 1 indicating extreme worry and 5 no worry). Group 1 patients also perceived their risk of prostate cancer to be significantly greater than that of controls (P = 0.001). No significant differences were found across state anxiety or Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-item Health Survey subscales. Sexual bother was greater for group 1 patients, with 19% reporting that sexual function was a moderate to big problem compared with 10% of group 2 patients (P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS:Men with abnormal prostate cancer screening tests report increased cancer-related worry and more problems with sexual function, despite having a negative biopsy result. Effective counseling interventions are needed before prostate cancer screening and during follow-up.
Authors: M L Essink-Bot; H J de Koning; H G Nijs; W J Kirkels; P J van der Maas; F H Schröder Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1998-06-17 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: R C Macefield; C Metcalfe; J A Lane; J L Donovan; K N L Avery; J M Blazeby; L Down; D E Neal; F C Hamdy; K Vedhara Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-04-06 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Sharon S Laing; Andy Bogart; Jessica Chubak; Sharon Fuller; Beverly B Green Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Koenraad van Renterghem; Gommert Van Koeveringe; Ruth Achten; Philip van Kerrebroeck Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2009-06-03 Impact factor: 2.370