GP KFPs / SAQs · mens-health
PSA testing and prostate cancer — KFP-style written assessment
KFP-style staged scenarios on PSA testing: the informed-choice consultation, risk-adapted testing intervals, the elevated-PSA pathway, MRI-before-biopsy decisions, grade group 1 surveillance, and treatment trade-off counselling after ProtecT.
On this page
Study tools
Target exams
RACGP KFPRACGP AKTMRCGP AKT
Prompt
PSA: a conversation before a test, a pathway after a number — informed choice, MRI triage, and trade-off counselling
KFP 1 (10 marks)
A 58-year-old accountant attends for a driver medical. He has read that 'the PSA test saves lives' and requests it. His father was diagnosed with prostate cancer at 65 and died at 72. He is well, no urinary symptoms, examination unremarkable. [19]
- What framework governs whether to order this test, and what must it include? (3) [19]
- Quantify the benefit and harm sides using ERSPC's final analysis. (4) [1]
- How does his family history modify your discussion? (3) [15]
Model answers
- Informed choice through shared decision-making — PSA-based screening combined with SDM is guideline-recommended. The pre-test consultation must cover realistic benefits (reduced prostate-cancer death), harms (overdiagnosis rising with age, false positives, biopsy morbidity including sepsis, treatment-related functional effects), proposed interval, and his own values about each. There is no organised programme; his request starts, not replaces, the conversation. [19]
- Benefit: at 23 years ERSPC showed 13% lower prostate-cancer mortality (RR 0.87), absolute reduction 0.22% — one death prevented per 456 men invited, one averted per 12 cancers diagnosed. Harm: cumulative incidence ran 30% higher in screened men (RR 1.30) — overdiagnosis — with downstream biopsy risks (PROMIS documented serious adverse events in 5.9% including sepsis) and treatment-related functional harms. At his age overdiagnosis remains relatively low (~16% projected for detection at 50, rising thereafter), which supports testing now rather than deferring. [1] [7] [14]
- A first-degree relative affected at 65 justifies an earlier start to informed-choice discussions and closer intervals than average-risk men; baseline PSA then stratifies his future — in ERSPC, men aged 55–69 with baseline PSA below 1.0 ng/mL had only ~1.2–1.5% 16-year risk of clinically significant cancer (delay or stop screening), while 3.0 ng/mL or above carried 13–14%. Document the agreed plan and interval. [15]
References13ShowHide
- [1]Roobol MJ, de Vos II, Månsson M et al. European Study of Prostate Cancer Screening - 23-Year Follow-up. The New England journal of medicine, 2025.PMID 41160819
- [2]Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ et al. Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet, 2014.PMID 25108889
- [3]Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA et al. Fifteen-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer. The New England journal of medicine, 2023.PMID 36912538
- [6]Donovan JL, Hamdy FC, Lane JA et al. Patient-Reported Outcomes 12 Years after Localized Prostate Cancer Treatment. NEJM evidence, 2023.PMID 38320051
- [7]Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet, 2017.PMID 28110982
- [14]Brentnall AR, Rebolj M, Sasieni P et al. Evaluating the Impact of Age on Prostate Cancer Overdiagnosis Using Long-Term Follow-Up From the CAP Randomised Trial. International journal of cancer, 2026.PMID 42015666
- [15]Remmers S, Bangma CH, Godtman RA et al. Relationship Between Baseline Prostate-specific Antigen on Cancer Detection and Prostate Cancer Death: Long-term Follow-up from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. European urology, 2023.PMID 37088597
- [16]Cirulli GO, Davis M, Stephens A et al. Midlife baseline prostate-specific antigen, velocity, and doubling time association with lethal prostate cancer and mortality. Cancer, 2025.PMID 39377255
- [19]Wei JT, Barocas D, Carlsson S et al. Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: AUA/SUO Guideline Part I: Prostate Cancer Screening. The Journal of urology, 2023.PMID 37096582
- [8]Hugosson J, Månsson M, Wallström J et al. Prostate Cancer Screening with PSA and MRI Followed by Targeted Biopsy Only. The New England journal of medicine, 2022.PMID 36477032
- [10]Vale CL, Fisher D, Kneebone A et al. Adjuvant or early salvage radiotherapy for the treatment of localised and locally advanced prostate cancer: a prospectively planned systematic review and meta-analysis of aggregate data. Lancet (London, England), 2020.PMID 33002431
- [21]García-Fuentes C, Hernández V, Jiménez-Alcaide E et al. Active Surveillance as Preferred Treatment for ISUP Grade I Prostate Cancer: Confronting the ProtecT Trial. Archivos espanoles de urologia, 2024.PMID 39632514
- [20]Magi-Galluzzi C, Montironi R, Epstein JI Contemporary Gleason grading and novel Grade Groups in clinical practice. Current opinion in urology, 2016.PMID 27308734