The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
it's a test that's approved by all insurances it should be done before any biopsy in my opinion there's really no case sure if the patient's PSA is a thousand and you just need a tissue diagnosis okay that's not let's not debate that
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
so today let's talk about what we can do with an MRI to check if we have suspicion based on these other blood-based biomarkers what can we do to increase the probability that if we actually go to the step of a biopsy the probability is sufficiently high that it was worth it