A decision aid versus shared decision making for prostate cancer screening: results of a randomized, controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Shared decision making (SDM) is widely encouraged by both the American Urological Association and Choosing Wisely for prostate cancer screening. Implementation of SDM is challenging secondary to time constraints and competing patient priorities. One strategy to mitigate the difficulties in implementing SDM is to utilize a decision aid (DA). Here we evaluate whether a DA improves a patient's prostate cancer knowledge and affects prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to usual care (UC), DA, or DA + SDM. Perception of quality of care was measured using the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey. Outcomes were stratified by long term provider relationship (LTPR, > 3 years) versus short term provider relationship (STPR, < 3 years). Knowledge of prostate cancer screening and the decision regarding screening were assessed. Groups were compared using ANOVA and logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 329 patients were randomized. Patients in the DA + SDM arm were significantly more likely to report discussing the implication of screening (33% DA + SDM, 22% UC, 16% DA, p = 0.0292) and answered significantly more knowledge questions correctly compared to the UC arm (5.03 versus 4.46, p = 0.046). However, those in the DA arm were significantly less likely to report that they always felt encouraged to discuss all health concerns (72% DA, 78% DA + SDM, 87% UC, p = 0.0285). Interestingly, STPR patients in the DA arm were significantly more likely to undergo PSA-based prostate cancer screening (41%) than the UC arm (8%, p = 0.019). This effect was not observed in the LTPR group. CONCLUSIONS: Providing patients a DA without a personal interaction resulted in a greater chance of undergoing PSA-based screening without improving knowledge about screening or understanding of the consequences of this decision. This effect was exacerbated by a shorter term provider relationship. With complex issues such as the decision to pursue PSA-based prostate cancer screening, tools cannot substitute for direct interaction with a trusted provider.

Screening for cancer: when to stop?: A practical guide and review of the evidence.

Deciding when to stop cancer screening in older adults is a complex challenge that involves multiple factors: individual health status and life expectancy; risks and benefits of screening, which vary with age and comorbidity; and individual preferences and values. This article examines current cancer screening practices and reviews the risks and benefits of cancer screening for colorectal, breast, lung, prostate, and cervical cancer, particularly in older individuals and those with multiple comorbidities. Tools for estimating life expectancy are reviewed, and a practical framework is presented to guide discussions on when the harms of screening likely outweigh the benefits.

Tumor immunity within the central nervous system stimulated by recombinant Listeria monocytogenes vaccination.

Tumors arising within the central nervous system (CNS) present the immune system with a challenging target, given the heterogeneous nature of these neoplasms and their location within an "immunologically privileged" site. We used the lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus nucleoprotein (LCMV-NP) as a pseudotumor antigen to investigate recombinant Listeria monocytogenes as a tumor vaccine against s.c. and intracerebral challenges with a NP-expressing glioma, 9L-NP. Using Fischer 344 rats, we demonstrate that vaccination with recombinant L. monocytogenes-NP stimulates protection against s.c., but not intracerebral, 9L-NP tumor challenge in an antigen-specific, CD8(+) T-cell-dependent manner. After s.c. tumor rejection, enhanced antitumor immunity is achieved via epitope spreading that permits complete resistance against lethal intracerebral challenge with 9L-NP and with the untransfected parental 9L tumor. Unlike the CD8(+)-dependent immune responses against s.c. 9L-NP tumors, this expanded intracerebral immunity against endogenous tumor-associated antigens is dependent on both CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells. Taken together, these results demonstrate that the mechanisms of tumor immunity within the brain are different from those elicited against non-CNS tumors. Furthermore, vaccination approaches exploiting the concept of epitope spreading may enhance the efficacy of antitumor immune responses within the immunologically privileged CNS, potentially mediating tumor cell killing through both CD4(+)- and CD8(+)-dependent effector pathways.