Prostate cancer is often discussed in alarming terms, but not all forms of the disease carry the same weight of risk. In fact, the most common form of prostate cancer Grade Group 1 (GG1) is typically not life-threatening. In many cases, it remains dormant for years, presenting little to no risk of spreading or harming the patient. This raises a pressing question: Should we even call it cancer?
Every year, roughly one in six men is diagnosed with prostate cancer, but most of these cases are classified as GG1, the least aggressive type. GG1 prostate cancer is typically slow-growing, confined to the prostate, and unlikely to spread (metastasize) to other parts of the body. It is often discovered incidentally through routine screenings, like the PSA test, which aims to catch more aggressive forms of the disease early. However, this approach has its drawbacks.
Dr. Matthew Cooperberg, a leading urologist at the University of California, San Francisco, argues that labeling GG1 as “cancer” only contributes to unnecessary anxiety and overtreatment. In a symposium with global experts, Dr. Cooperberg and his colleagues discussed the possibility of renaming GG1 prostate cancer, a change that could alleviate the emotional burden men face upon diagnosis. He believes that reframing this diagnosis could help men avoid unnecessary treatments that come with harmful side effects.
The typical treatment approach for GG1 cancer is “active surveillance.” This means doctors monitor the disease through periodic PSA tests, biopsies, and imaging, intervening only if the cancer shows signs of progression. Despite this, many men opt for immediate treatment, often in the form of surgery or radiation. According to Dr. Cooperberg, about 40% of men with low-risk prostate cancer in the U.S. undergo treatment immediately, driven largely by the emotional weight of the term “cancer.” For many, hearing the “C-word” triggers fear of a disease that spreads and kills, regardless of the actual threat posed by the specific cancer.
This emotional reaction is not trivial. It leads to a pattern of overtreatment, with thousands of men undergoing surgeries and radiation unnecessarily. These treatments, while lifesaving for aggressive cancers, can cause lasting side effects, including incontinence, erectile dysfunction, and other health complications. The broader consequences of a cancer diagnosis are also significant—men with the “cancer” label may experience negative effects on their relationships, careers, and even their ability to secure life insurance or health coverage.
One of the major points raised at the symposium was the proposal to rename GG1 cancer to “acinar neoplasm.” This term would highlight the abnormal growth of cells without implying imminent danger. While some experts were concerned that a name change could affect patient compliance with active surveillance, Dr. Cooperberg argues that men diagnosed with pure GG1 should not be burdened with a diagnosis that has zero capacity to harm them.
In the end, this debate calls for a more nuanced conversation about what it means to live with a “cancer” diagnosis. For many men with GG1 prostate cancer, the label carries a heavy emotional toll, despite the fact that their condition may never pose a significant health risk. By reconsidering the terminology and focusing on careful monitoring rather than immediate treatment, we could reduce unnecessary suffering and help men make more informed decisions about their healthcare.
Ultimately, it’s time to reconsider whether calling it “cancer” is truly the best choice for everyone diagnosed with prostate cancer. For some, a gentler term might offer both peace of mind and a better quality of life, without compromising the necessary vigilance in managing their condition.
