In reply: We thank Mark and colleagues and Woo and Murphy for their comments. We agree that the lack of information on prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) and T stage of the tumours is a weakness of our study, which was acknowledged in the article. The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade of the tumour is a reliable predictor of prognosis by itself and unarguably one of the key determinants for making treatment recommendations. The fact remains that there were stark differences between the private and public health systems in the type of treatment men with similar grade tumours chose, even when corrected for a number of possible variables. This choice depends largely on how a patient’s prognosis is assessed by his treating specialist using any one of many available and differing prognostic tools.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Glasziou PP, Jones MA, Pathirana T, et al. Estimating the magnitude of cancer overdiagnosis in Australia. Med J Aust 2020; 212: 163–168. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2020/212/4/estimating-magnitude-cancer-overdiagnosis-australia
- 2. Culp MB, Soerjomataram I, Efstathiou JA, et al. Recent global patterns in prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates. Eur Urol 2020; 77: 38–52.
No relevant disclosures.