Author Interviews, JAMA, NIH / 23.05.2018

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_41923" align="alignleft" width="146"]Jennifer Villani, PhD, MPH Office of Disease Prevention National Institutes of Health Dr. Villani[/caption] Jennifer Villani, PhD, MPH Office of Disease Prevention National Institutes of Health MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?  Response: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) develops recommendations for the delivery of clinical preventive services based on the highest quality scientific evidence available. We performed a comprehensive assessment of the sources of funding for the research studies in this evidence base. The results showed that government agencies supported the most articles (56%), with the remaining support coming from nonprofits or universities (32%), and industry (17%). The National Institutes of Health was the single largest funder of research articles underlying the USPSTF recommendations. 
Author Interviews, JAMA, Prostate Cancer / 11.05.2018

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_41344" align="alignleft" width="143"]Alex Krist, M.D., M.P.H Professor of family medicine and population health Virginia Commonwealth University and Active clinician and teacher at the Fairfax Family Practice residency Dr. Krist[/caption] Alex Krist, M.D., M.P.H Professor of family medicine and population health Virginia Commonwealth University and Active clinician and teacher at the Fairfax Family Practice residency MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers to affect men. However, the decision about whether to be screened is complex and personal. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force reviewed the latest research on the benefits and harms of screening for prostate cancer using PSA-based testing, as well as evidence on treatment. We found that men who are 55 to 69 years old should discuss the benefits and harms of screening with their doctor, so they can make the best choice for themselves based on their values and individual circumstances. Men age 70 and older should not be screened, as the benefits of screening diminish as men age and the harms are greater.
Author Interviews, Cancer Research, Dermatology, Environmental Risks, JAMA, Melanoma / 23.03.2018

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_40724" align="alignleft" width="142"]John W. Epling, Jr., M.D. Dr. Epling[/caption] John W. Epling, Jr., M.D., M.S.Ed., Task Force Member Dr. Epling is is a professor of Family and Community Medicine at the Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine in Roanoke, VA. He is also the Medical Director of Research for Family and Community Medicine, Medical Director of Employee Health and Wellness for the Carilion Clinic, and maintains an active clinical primary care practice.  MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Skin cancer is the most common type of cancer in the U.S., affecting millions of people every year. The Task Force looked at the latest research to see if clinicians can help people prevent skin cancer by providing counseling about ways to reduce risk, including using sunscreen, wearing protective clothing, and avoiding sunlight during peak hours. [caption id="attachment_40730" align="alignleft" width="150"]Sunburn damaged skin - wiki image Sunburn damage - wiki image[/caption] Based on our review of the evidence, we found that counseling younger patients with a fair skin type and their parents is effective at encouraging these sun protective behaviors. By helping reduce their patients’ exposure to harmful UV rays, clinicians can decrease their risk for skin cancer. As such, we recommend that clinicians provide counseling to people who are six months to 24 years old and have a fair skin type. For adults over 24 with a fair skin type, clinicians should consider the individual’s risks for skin cancer when deciding whether or not to provide counseling. 
Author Interviews, Endocrinology, JAMA, Menopause, OBGYNE / 13.12.2017

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_38906" align="alignleft" width="200"]Dr-Suzanne Fenske.jpg Dr. Fenske[/caption] Dr. Suzanne Fenske, MD Assistant Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Science Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai  MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: USPSTF recommendations are based off several studies, but is mainly based off of the Women's Health Initiative. The Women's Health Initiative was a 15 year prevention study with a focus on death, disability and impaired quality of life in postmenopausal women. This study was originally performed in 1991. The USPSTF reevaluated the data along with several other studies to assess the role of hormone replacement therapy in prevention of chronic diseases such as heart disease, stroke, blood clot, gallbladder disease, dementia.  The USPSTF has found that hormone replacement therapy has some benefit in reducing the risk of fractures, and, potentially, diabetes.  The USPSTF has found that hormone replacement therapy can increase the risk of coronary artery disease, stroke, blood clot, gall bladder disease, urinary incontinence and dementia. With these risks, the USPSTF states that hormone replacement therapy should not be used as a preventative medicine, but, rather, used for treatment of symptomatic menopause and not prevention of osteoporosis or heart disease.
Author Interviews, JAMA, Prostate Cancer, UCSF / 24.04.2017

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_34129" align="alignleft" width="154"]Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, Ph.D., M.D., M.A.S. Lee Goldman, MD, endowed chair in medicine and professor of medicine and of epidemiology and biostatistics University of California, San Francisco Chair of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Dr. Bibbins-Domingo[/caption] Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, Ph.D., M.D., M.A.S. Lee Goldman, MD, endowed chair in medicine and professor of medicine and of epidemiology and biostatistics University of California, San Francisco Chair of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers to affect men, and the Task Force believes all men should be aware of the benefits and harms of screening for prostate cancer. Prostate cancer screening with PSA testing can help men reduce their chance of dying of prostate cancer or of having metastatic cancer. These are important benefits but occur in a small number of men. There are risks associated with screening, specifically overdiagnosis and overtreatment with surgery and radiation that can have important side effects like impotence and incontinence. Since the release of our 2012 recommendation, new evidence has emerged that increased the Task Force’s confidence in the benefits of screening, which include reducing the risk of metastatic cancer (a cancer that spreads) and reducing the chance of dying from prostate cancer. This draft recommendation also reflects new evidence on the use of active surveillance in men with low-risk prostate cancers that may help mitigate some of the harms in these men by allowing some men with low risk cancer to delay or avoid surgery or radiation. Therefore, in our new 2017 draft recommendation, the Task Force encourages men ages 55 to 69 to make an individual decision about whether to be screened after a conversation with their clinician about the potential benefits and harms. For men age 70 years and older, the potential benefits do not outweigh the harms, and these men should not be screened for prostate cancer.
Author Interviews, Biomarkers, Cancer, Prostate Cancer, UT Southwestern / 08.10.2016

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Dr Ryan Hutchinson MD and Yair Lotan MD Department of Urology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: The United States Preventative Services Task Force recommendation against PSA screening generated significant controversy. Research since then has relied heavily on survey data to examine the impact of the recommendation on PSA screening practices. In a hotly charged issue such as this, such data can carry significant bias. We examined a large, whole-institution data in the years before and after the USPSTF recommendations reflecting actual practice and found that the changes in PSA use at our institution, if any, were small. This is more consistent with behavior seen after the vast majority of practice recommendations.