Display options
Cite
Rovito MJ, Manjelievskaia J, Leone JE, et al. From 'D' to 'I': A critique of the current United States preventive services task force recommendation for testicular cancer screening. Prev Med Rep. 2016;3:361-6doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.04.006.
Rovito, M. J., Manjelievskaia, J., Leone, J. E., Lutz, M. J., & Nangia, A. (2016). From 'D' to 'I': A critique of the current United States preventive services task force recommendation for testicular cancer screening. Preventive medicine reports, 3361-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.04.006
Rovito, Michael J, et al. "From 'D' to 'I': A critique of the current United States preventive services task force recommendation for testicular cancer screening." Preventive medicine reports vol. 3 (2016): 361-6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.04.006
Rovito MJ, Manjelievskaia J, Leone JE, Lutz MJ, Nangia A. From 'D' to 'I': A critique of the current United States preventive services task force recommendation for testicular cancer screening. Prev Med Rep. 2016 Apr 21;3:361-6. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.04.006. eCollection 2016 Jun. PMID: 27419037; PMCID: PMC4929233.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Prev Med Rep. 2016 Apr 21;3:361-6. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.04.006. eCollection 2016 Jun.

From 'D' to 'I': A critique of the current United States preventive services task force recommendation for testicular cancer screening.

Preventive medicine reports

Michael J Rovito, Janna Manjelievskaia, James E Leone, Michael J Lutz, Ajay Nangia

Affiliations

  1. College of Health and Public Affairs, Department of Health Professions, University of Central Florida, 12805 Pegasus Drive, HPA1 Room 269, Orlando, FL 32828, United States.
  2. Mayes College of Healthcare Business and Policy, Department of Health Policy and Public Health, University of the Sciences in Philadelphia, 600 S 43rd St, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
  3. Department of Movement Arts, Health Promotion, and Leisure Studies, Bridgewater State University, Bridgewater, MA 02325, United States.
  4. Michigan Institute of Urology, 6900 Orchard Lake Rd. West Bloomfield, MI 48322, United States.
  5. Dept. of Urology, University of Kansas Medical Center, 3901 Rainbow Blvd, Kansas City, KS 66160, United States.

PMID: 27419037 PMCID: PMC4929233 DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.04.006

Abstract

In 2004, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) gave testicular cancer (TCa) screening a 'D' recommendation, discouraging the use of this preventive service. The USPSTF suggested that screening, inclusive of testicular self-examination (TSE) and clinician examination, does not reduce TCa mortality rates and that the high risk of false positives could serve as a detriment to patient quality of life. Others suggests that TCa screening is ineffective at detecting early-stage cases of TCa and readily highlights a lack of empirical evidence demonstrating said efficacy. These assertions, however, stand in stark contrast to the widely held support of TCa screening among practicing public health professionals, advocacy groups, and clinicians. In this present study, a review was conducted of the methods and processes used by the USPSTF in their 2011 reaffirmation of the 'D' grade recommendation. The evidence base and commentary offered as to why TSE, as part of the overall recommendation for TCa screening, was given a 'D' grade were analyzed for logical reasoning and methodological rigor. Considering the methodological flaws and the veritable lack of evidence needed to grant a conclusive recommendation, the question is raised if the current 'D' grade for TCa screening (i.e. discourage the use of said service) should be changed to an 'I' statement (i.e. the balance of benefits and harms is indeterminate). Therefore the purpose of this paper is to present the evidence of TCa screening in the context of efficacy and prevention in order for the field to reassess its relative value.

Keywords: Early detection of cancer; Practice guidelines as topic; Self-examination; Testicular neoplasms

References

  1. Cancer Med. 2014 Dec;3(6):1629-34 - PubMed
  2. Am J Mens Health. 2013 May;7(3):243-54 - PubMed
  3. Prev Med. 2005 Jun;40(6):628-35 - PubMed
  4. World J Urol. 2011 Jun;29(3):387-91 - PubMed
  5. Ann Intern Med. 2010 Sep 21;153(6):396-9 - PubMed
  6. Prev Med. 2005 Aug;41(2):386-98 - PubMed
  7. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2013 Sep;40(3):413-27 - PubMed
  8. Am J Prev Med. 2015 Aug;49(2 Suppl 1):S14-22 - PubMed
  9. Am J Mens Health. 2016 Feb 26;:null - PubMed
  10. Am J Prev Med. 2001 Apr;20(3 Suppl):13-20 - PubMed
  11. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Apr 5;154(7):483-6 - PubMed
  12. AIDS Behav. 2014 Jul;18 Suppl 4:S445-9 - PubMed
  13. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013 Sep;149(3):356-9 - PubMed
  14. Int J STD AIDS. 2014 Oct;25(12):844-50 - PubMed
  15. Ann Intern Med. 2009 Feb 3;150(3):199-205 - PubMed
  16. Arch Dis Child. 2013 Jan;98(1):20-6 - PubMed
  17. Am J Mens Health. 2015 May 19;:null - PubMed
  18. J Adolesc Health. 2012 Apr;50(4):424-5 - PubMed
  19. J Adolesc Health. 2009 Apr;44(4):404-6 - PubMed
  20. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2016 Jan;43(1):E8-23 - PubMed
  21. Am Fam Physician. 2005 Nov 15;72(10):2069-70 - PubMed
  22. PLoS One. 2015 Nov 25;10(11):e0141244 - PubMed
  23. J Health Commun. 2014;19(3):303-20 - PubMed
  24. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Feb 16;(2):CD007853 - PubMed
  25. Urol Oncol. 2015 Sep;33(9):413-9 - PubMed
  26. Eur Urol. 2015 Aug;68(2):283-9 - PubMed
  27. J Am Acad Nurse Pract. 2002 Mar;14(3):100-2 - PubMed
  28. Am Psychol. 2003 Jan;58(1):5-14 - PubMed
  29. Urol Clin North Am. 2014 May;41(2):249-55 - PubMed
  30. Ann Intern Med. 2007 Jul 17;147(2):117-22 - PubMed
  31. Curr Urol Rep. 2014 Jul;15(7):420 - PubMed
  32. Br J Gen Pract. 1998 Aug;48(433):1509-14 - PubMed
  33. JAMA. 2015 Nov 17;314(19):2021-2 - PubMed
  34. Eur Urol. 2014 Jun;65(6):1095-106 - PubMed
  35. Nurs Res. 2014 May-Jun;63(3):203-10 - PubMed
  36. J Pediatr Health Care. 2016 Nov - Dec;30(6):518-527 - PubMed

Publication Types