From the article:
" All 232 men in the study were assessed as healthy when their biopsies were examined by pathologists. After less than two-and-a-half years, half of the men in the study had developed aggressive prostate cancer…"
HALF? I’d suggest staying away from that study … either they don’t know what they’re doing, or some AI made up that article…
From the peer-reviewed paper: “This study examined if artificial intelligence (AI) could detect these
morphological clues in benign biopsies from men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels
to predict subsequent diagnosis of clinically significant PCa within 30 months”… so yes, these were men who all had high cancer risk.
From the article: " All 232 men in the study were assessed as healthy when their biopsies were examined by pathologists. After less than two-and-a-half years, half of the men in the study had developed aggressive prostate cancer…"
HALF? I’d suggest staying away from that study … either they don’t know what they’re doing, or some AI made up that article…
From the peer-reviewed paper: “This study examined if artificial intelligence (AI) could detect these morphological clues in benign biopsies from men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels to predict subsequent diagnosis of clinically significant PCa within 30 months”… so yes, these were men who all had high cancer risk.
And the risk of prostate cancer from age 60 on is quite high and increases with age, even if you’re not in a high risk group (other than age).
OK, thanks for that clarification. I was thrown off by ‘assessed as healthy…’
Maybe they specifically picked men with increased risk?
Half sounds pretty nuts otherwise.
Yes they did. It says so in the article.
ba dum tss
Well, it’s likely that AI is creating these articles. We’re just like in 1984…