Why the PSA conversation demands nuance, not automatism
The biology of prostate cancer is heterogeneous: a significant proportion progresses very slowly (Gleason 6, ISUP 1) and does not cause mortality in patient's relevant life span. Another proportion is clinically aggressive (Gleason 8-10, ISUP 4-5) with real risk of metastasis and death. PSA detects both without distinguishing — and that is the root of the screening dilemma.
USPSTF 2018 recommends shared decision on PSA in men 55-69 (not automatic universal screening). Clinical trials (PLCO 2009, ERSPC 2014) showed modest mortality reduction by screening, but with significant cost: overdiagnosis and overtreatment (incontinence, erectile dysfunction). In low-risk cancers, active surveillance (Klotz 2015 JCO) has proven valid option — avoids unnecessary treatment without increasing mortality.
PSA is not an automatic universal screening — it's an informed conversation with risk-benefit balance. That's what the conventional system rarely has time for.