Prostate Health

Fish oil: friend or foe?

Howard LeWine, M.D.
Howard LeWine, M.D., Chief Medical Editor, Internet Publishing, Harvard Health Publications

News out of Seattle is sure to fuel confusion about fish oil supplements. A study by scientists at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle linked eating a lot of oily fish or taking potent fish oil supplements to a 43% increased risk for prostate cancer overall, and a 71% increased risk for aggressive prostate cancer. Fish oil loaded with omega-3 fatty acids, which play important roles in health. Deficiencies in them have been linked to a variety of health problems, including cardiovascular disease, some cancers, mood disorders, arthritis, and more. But that doesn’t mean taking high doses translates to better health and disease prevention. Despite this one study, you should still consider eating fish and other seafood as a healthy strategy. Twice a week is a good goal.

Healthy fats may fight early-stage prostate cancer

Daniel Pendick
Daniel Pendick, Former Executive Editor, Harvard Men's Health Watch

Each year, nearly a quarter of a million American men learn they have prostate cancer. Most are diagnosed with early-stage cancer that has not spread beyond the prostate gland. Traditional treatments include surgery, radiation therapy, and a “watch and wait” strategy called active surveillance. A new study published online this week in JAMA Internal Medicine indicates that diet may be an important add-on. The study, part of the ongoing Harvard-based Health Professionals Follow-up Study, suggests that eating more foods that deliver healthy vegetable oils can help fight the second leading cause of cancer death in men. Earlier studies have implicated the traditional Western diet, which is relatively high in red meat and other sources of animal fats, with a higher risk for developing prostate cancer in the first place, while eating more vegetable oils and vegetable protein may help prevent it.

Harvard expert urges caution for use of new prostate cancer test

Daniel Pendick
Daniel Pendick, Former Executive Editor, Harvard Men's Health Watch

The FDA has approved a new kind of PSA test for prostate cancer that its maker claims can help doctors do a better job of telling the difference between prostate cancer and less worrisome conditions such as prostate infection or benign prostate enlargement. The test, called the Prostate Health Index (PHI), should become available in the U.S. later this summer. The PHI combines measurements of three kinds of prostate specific antigen (PSA), a protein produced by the prostate gland. In theory, the combination could help reduce the number of men who undergo prostate biopsies when their PSA levels are slightly above normal, in the 4 to 10 nanogram per milliliter range. But doctors must take care not to allow use of the PHI test to worsen the existing overdiagnosis and overtreatment of low-risk cancers, according to Dr. Marc B. Garnick, an expert in prostate cancer at Harvard Medical School and editor in chief of HarvardProstateKnowledge.org.

PSA screening for prostate cancer: a doctor’s perspective

Marc B. Garnick, M.D.
Marc B. Garnick, M.D., Editor in Chief, HarvardProstateKnowledge.org

Yesterday’s announcement that men should not get routine PSA tests to check for hidden prostate cancer is sure to spark controversy for months to come. But the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) made the right decision. On the surface, rejecting the use of a simple blood test that can detect cancer in its early and still-treatable stage sounds foolish. Cynics have been saying it is the handiwork of a group concerned more about health-care rationing and cutting costs than about health. The decision is wise, not foolish, and will improve men’s health, not harm it. The word “cancer” usually brings to mind images of a fast-growing cluster of cells that, without aggressive treatment, will invade other parts of the body, damage health, and potentially kill. That certainly describes many cancers. But not most prostate cancers. Most of the time, prostate cancer is sloth-like. It tends to grow slowly and remain confined to the prostate gland, with many men never knowing during their entire lives that a cancer was present. These slow-growing prostate cancers cause no symptoms and never threaten health or longevity. That means many men with prostate “cancer” never need treatment.

Panel says “no” to routine prostate cancer testing

Patrick J. Skerrett, Former Executive Editor, Harvard Health

A simple blood test to check seemingly healthy men for hidden prostate cancer does more harm than good and shouldn’t be part of routine medical care. That’s the long-awaited final recommendation from the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), published today in Annals of Internal Medicine. About half of men over age 40 get this test as part of a regular checkup. It measures the amount of a protein called prostate-specific antigen, or PSA, in the bloodstream. An above-normal PSA level can signal hidden prostate cancer. But it can also be a sign of prostate infection, an enlarged prostate, and other problems. Hunting for hidden disease in the absence of any outward signs or symptoms is called screening. The task force says that for every 1,000 men who have routine PSA tests, 0 to 1 deaths from prostate cancer will be prevented. But that is offset by 3 serious cardiovascular deaths due to treatment, along with 47 men who will live with treatment-related erectile dysfunction or incontinence.

Buffett’s prostate cancer: poor decisions

Marc B. Garnick, M.D.
Marc B. Garnick, M.D., Editor in Chief, HarvardProstateKnowledge.org

Warren Buffett may be the second richest man in America, but he appears to be getting the poorest medical advice. Buffett announced to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders last week that he has early stage prostate cancer that “is not remotely life-threatening or even debilitating in any meaningful way.” If Buffett’s cancer had been detected because he […]

New study won’t end debate on PSA test for prostate cancer

Robert H. Shmerling, MD
Robert H. Shmerling, MD, Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publications

A large study from Europe does little to resolve the controversy over whether men should have a simple blood test to look for hidden prostate cancer. In the study, the number of deaths over the course of the 11-year study were the same in men tested for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and in men who didn’t have the test. Because prostate cancer usually grows very slowly, detecting it in an older man generally isn’t helpful. Some men live with the side effects of treatment—notably impotence and incontinence—for a cancer that would have had no effect on the length or quality of their lives. This study and others suggest that we rethink the widespread use of PSA testing, especially the yearly screening that is common in the United States.

For some prostate cancers, waiting beats treatment

Howard LeWine, M.D.
Howard LeWine, M.D., Chief Medical Editor, Internet Publishing, Harvard Health Publications

Many prostate cancers grow very slowly and never escape the prostate. They cause no symptoms, and never threaten health or life. Yet almost 90% of men told they have prostate cancer opt for immediate treatment with surgery or radiation therapy—which often cause trouble getting or keeping an erection and an assortment of urinary problems. Yesterday, a panel of experts convened by the National Institutes of Health recommended that many men with localized, low-risk prostate cancer be closely monitored, and that treatment be delayed until there was evidence that the disease was progressing.

New prostate cancer screening recommendation generates controversy and confusion

Ann MacDonald
Ann MacDonald, Contributor, Harvard Health

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is expected soon to release an updated statement on PSA (prostate-specific antigen) testing for men, recommending for the first time that healthy men avoid getting regular PSA tests. This is big news, as the PSA test is one of the most common prostate cancer screening tests around.

Surprising findings on omega-3 fats, trans fats, and prostate cancer risk

Suzanne Rose, Former Editor, Harvard Health

A new study challenges the conventional wisdom that heart-healthy omega-3 fats from fish, walnuts, and other sources are good for the prostate and that artery-damaging trans fats are bad for it. Suzanne Rose, editor of Harvard Health’s Annual Report on Prostate Diseases, explains.