text_1: Early Prostate Cancer Kept at Bay in Two Studies for High-Risk Men
text_2: This story summarizes the results of two studies involving drugs for the treatment of prostate cancer. The main takeaway from the story is that in certain men with high-risk cancers who’ve already had their prostates removed, the drugs extended the amount of time before these men’s cancer spread beyond the prostate. The story helpfully quantifies the amount of time the drugs bought these men in absolute terms. But the story missed some important context. For example, the story is totally silent on the issue of adverse effects and how many patients suffered them. And it doesn’t caution that the outcome reported in the study — “metastasis-free survival” — may not translate to a corresponding increase in patients’ overall length of life. Disease-mongering was also a concern. The story features statistics about the huge numbers of prostate cancers diagnosed each year, but it doesn’t acknowledge that most of these cancers will never progress to cause problems for the patient. Moreover, it erroneously suggests that prostate removal is the “typical” approach to the treatment of early prostate cancer, when no treatment at all is the approach favored by about half of all men who receive such a diagnosis. An independent source would probably have helped bring some balance to the coverage, but the only experts quoted had a vested interest in the research. Despite having their prostates removed, men with aggressive forms of prostate cancer face a higher risk of having that cancer spread beyond the prostate. There is currently little that such men can do following initial treatment except watch and wait, but these preliminary results suggest that certain drugs may delay the spread of these cancers. Until the results are published and scrutinized by other researchers, however, it’s best to reserve judgment and view the claims of vested interests skeptically.