Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Clinical Research

Shared decision making and prostate-specific antigen based prostate cancer screening following the 2018 update of USPSTF screening guideline

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 24, pages 77–80 (2021)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background

Previous study reported shared decision making was underused in PSA-based prostate cancer screening. In mid-2018, the US Preventive Service Task Force recommended shared decision making (SDM) before PSA-based prostate cancer screening among men aged 55–69 year while remained against PSA testing in men aged 70 or older. The objective of this study is to examine recent changes in SDM and prostate cancer screening following recent USPSTF recommendations.

Methods

A retrospective cross-sectional study among men aged 50 years or older were conducted using 2015 and 2018 National Health Interview Survey data (n = 10,926). Outcomes included self-reported PSA testing for prostate cancer screening last year, and if yes, whether respondent ever had a discussion with the healthcare provider about its advantages and disadvantages. Analyses were stratified by respondent’s age (50–54 vs. 55–69 vs. 70+).

Results

Routine PSA screening rates remained stable from 34.3% in 2015 to 35.4% in first half of 2018, and 36.0% in second half of 2018 (p trend = 0.57). A similar pattern was found in men ≥70 years (p trend = 0.98). Receipt of SDM increased in men aged ≥50 years from 30.5% in 2015 to 33.6% in first half of 2018, and 36.7% in second half of 2018 (p trend = 0.002). The increase was most prominent in men aged 55 to 69 years (31.6, 36.9, and 40.2% in 2015, first half of 2018 and second half of 2018 respectively; p trend = 0.001).

Conclusions

Between 2015 and 2018, there was no significant increase in the PSA-based prostate cancer screening. However, a significant increasing trend in SDM was observed, especially in men aged 55–69 years.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Recent patterns in prostate-specific antigen based prostate cancer screening and shared decision making by age group in the United States, 2015 and 2018 National Health Interview Survey.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wolf AM, Wender RC, Etzioni RB, Thompson IM, D’Amico AV, Volk RJ, et al. American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of prostate cancer: update 2010. CA Cancer J Clin. 2010;60:70–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Carter HB, Albertsen PC, Barry MJ, Etzioni R, Freedland SJ, Greene KL, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA Guideline. J Urol. 2013;190:419–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. USPSTF. Screening for prostate cancer: US preventive services task force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2018;319:1901–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Leyva B, Persoskie A, Ottenbacher A, Hamilton JG, Allen JD, Kobrin SC, et al. Do men receive information required for shared decision making about psa testing? Results from a national survey. J Cancer Educ. 2016;31:693–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fedewa SA, Gansler T, Smith R, Sauer AG, Wender R, Brawley OW, et al. Recent patterns in shared decision making for prostate-specific antigen testing in the United States. Ann Fam Med. 2018;16:139–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. National Center for Health Statistics. National Health Interview Survey. Public-use data file and documentation (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis/nhis_questionnaires.htm). National Center for Health Statistics; 2018.

  7. Li J, Ding H, Richards TB, Martin I, Kobrin S, Marcus PM. Prostate-specific antigen testing initiation and shared decision-making: Findings from the 2000 and 2015 national health interview surveys. J Am Board Fam Med. 2018;31:658–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fedewa SA, Ward EM, Brawley O, Jemal A. Recent patterns of prostate-specific antigen testing for prostate cancer screening in the United States. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177:1040–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jemal A, Fedewa SA, Ma J, Siegel R, Lin CC, Brawley O, et al. Prostate cancer incidence and PSA testing patterns in relation to USPSTF screening recommendations. JAMA. 2015;314:2054–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Moyer VA. USPSTF. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157:120–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Gulati R, Mariotto AB, Schechter CB, De Carvalho TM, Knudsen AB, et al. Personalizing age of cancer screening cessation based on comorbid conditions: model estimates of harms and benefits. Ann Intern Med. 2014;161:104–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Heijnsdijk EAM, Wever EM, Auvinen A, Hugosson J, Ciatto S, Nelen V, et al. Quality-of-life effects of prostate-specific antigen screening. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:595–605.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Torke AM, Schwartz PH, Holtz LR, Montz K, Sachs GA. Older adults and forgoing cancer screening: “I Think It Would Be Strange”. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:526–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

CJ and XH had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Concept and design: All authors. Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors. Drafting of the paper: All authors. Critical revision of the paper for important intellectual content: All authors. Statistical analysis: CJ and XH. Administrative, technical, or material support: CJ and XH. Supervision: SAF, AJ, and XH.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, Mount Sinai St Luke’s and Mount Sinai West Hospital, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA

    Changchuan Jiang

  2. Surveillance and Health Services Research, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Stacey A. Fedewa, Ahmedin Jemal & Xuesong Han

  3. Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Yumeng Wen

Authors
  1. Changchuan Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stacey A. Fedewa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yumeng Wen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ahmedin Jemal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Xuesong Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Changchuan Jiang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jiang, C., Fedewa, S.A., Wen, Y. et al. Shared decision making and prostate-specific antigen based prostate cancer screening following the 2018 update of USPSTF screening guideline. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 24, 77–80 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-020-0227-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-020-0227-1

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links