The Prostate Net

09/10/2026

I am pleased to be part of the conversation tonight on the subject of evolving cancer treatments.

Join us for an insightful session as our expert speakers share the latest updates in prostate cancer and pediatric cancer treatment, exploring advances in care, treatment options, and what they mean for patients and families in Nigeria.

Tune in and join the conversation LIVE at: https://www.youtube.com/live/4IbUnKBJ3dA?si=t02fNOrA3FCxz3c-

2:00 PM EST
7:00 PM WAT (Lagos)
8:00 PM CET

09/10/2026

Due to an emergency weather situation here, we had to re-schedule our interview with Dr. Tania Estape to a later date.

However in keeping with the theme we re-played the important interview with Dr. Hein Van Poppel and Dr. Joaquin Mateo talking about "The Alpha to Omega of Prostate Cancer."

You review the interview at:

The Alpha to Omega of Prostate Cancer: From Early Detection to Prec...

09/08/2026

“You don't have to wait until you're in crisis to ask for psychological support.”

09/08/2026

The prostate cancer disparity among Black men is well documented. They are more likely to develop aggressive disease and more likely to die from it.

So when the University of Oklahoma receives a $2.9 million NCI grant to test an app designed to increase prostate cancer screening among Black men, it is certainly worth watching.

The study will enroll 684 Black men in Oklahoma who are not up to date with PSA screening. The app combines education, motivation, at-home finger-stick PSA testing, and access to prostate cancer survivors for support.

It is an innovative approach—but several questions deserve answers.

Can 684 men actually be recruited and retained?
Historically, recruiting Black men into research has been challenging. Reaching men who are most disconnected from healthcare may be even harder.

Will the at-home blood test work reliably?
A finger-stick sample could remove an important barrier to screening. But what happens when the sample is inadequate—or when the PSA is elevated?

Does education inform—or simply persuade?
The app needs to provide balanced information about the benefits and limitations of PSA screening, not simply convince men to take the test.

Who supports the patient?
The fact that the study will connect men with Black prostate cancer survivors when needed could be enormously powerful. But those peer supporters need standardized training and clear protocols so that medical questions receive accurate, consistent answers.

And perhaps the most important question:
What happens AFTER the PSA?

Getting a man screened is only the first step.

An equitable pathway must continue from:

Screening → abnormal result → medical evaluation → appropriate diagnosis → treatment → ongoing care.

If the app succeeds in getting men tested but cannot help them navigate what comes next, we have not eliminated the disparity—we have simply moved it downstream.

Technology can open the door. But we need to make sure there is a path through it.

This is a study we should be watching closely. Read the article at: https://www.ou.edu/news/articles/2026/September/prostate-cancer-screening-gap

We Inform to fight!
Because informed patients change outcomes.

A newly funded study at the University of Oklahoma aims to increase prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening among Black men in Oklahoma, who die from prostate cancer at rates two to four times higher than other racial groups. An interactive app called Connect2Care may hold the key to early detecti...

09/03/2026

Knowledge can make a difference.
Be Informed. Be Proactive. Be Empowered.

09/03/2026

Health Disparities Don't Begin in the Doctor's Office!

This is Prostate Cancer Awareness Month and, among many other things, we talk frequently about health disparities.

We talk about poverty, education, housing, environmental exposures, access to healthcare and systemic bias. All are important. But are we looking far enough back to understand why some disparities persist?

A recent study reported by Science offers a remarkable perspective. Researchers examined U.S. counties according to the proportion of their population that was enslaved in 1860 and compared that history with Black-white mortality differences more than 150 years later.

The finding was striking: in counties where 92% of the population had been enslaved, the Black-white mortality gap in the 2010s exceeded 200 additional deaths per 100,000 people—approximately 20 times the gap in counties where no slavery had been recorded.

The researchers did not suggest that slavery directly determines an individual's health today. Instead, they found evidence that its legacy appears to operate through conditions that persist today—including residential segregation, economic inequality and differences in educational attainment.

That gives us another way to think about health inequity: A disparity may be visible today, while the forces contributing to it may have been accumulating for generations.

For patients, that matters.
When we ask:

Why was this cancer diagnosed so late?
Why didn't this patient receive genetic testing?
Why was a clinical trial unavailable—or seemingly unavailable?
Why doesn't this patient trust the healthcare system?
Why does accessing a major cancer center seem so much easier for some patients than others?

—we need to look beyond the immediate encounter with the healthcare system.

And this becomes particularly important as cancer care moves toward precision medicine, personalized treatment based on a patient's tumor biology, biomarkers and genetics.

But precision medicine cannot be truly precise if the evidence behind it does not adequately represent the people who need it.

That brings us to an important question for patient advocates: Who is missing?

Who is missing from genetic testing?
Who is missing from clinical trials?
Who is missing from the datasets used to develop new treatments?

And perhaps most importantly: Why are they missing?

Those questions cannot be answered by researchers alone. They require patients and advocates to bring the realities of their communities into the conversation.

We cannot change history. But we can decide whether the consequences of history continue to influence who participates in research, who benefits from medical advances and who receives the best possible care.

Health equity begins by understanding the barriers—and then refusing to accept them as inevitable.

​Read the article at: https://www.science.org/content/article/slavery-linked-mortality-gap-between-black-and-white-americans-today #

New study is among the first to quantify and explain slavery’s influence in contemporary U.S. health disparities

08/24/2026

Artificial intelligence is no longer something that belongs to the future of healthcare.

The U.S. FDA has now authorized more than 1,500 AI-enabled medical devices - see:
https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/software-medical-device-samd/artificial-intelligence-enabled-medical-devices

Many are used in radiology and imaging, but AI is also beginning to do something even more consequential: help estimate what may happen to a patient's cancer in the future.

For men with prostate cancer, that is already becoming a reality.
One FDA-authorized technology, ArteraAI Prostate, analyzes digitized prostate biopsy tissue and provides estimates of a man's risk of developing distant metastases and dying from prostate cancer over the following 10 years.

That raises an important question:

If AI can predict cancer risk, should patients trust the prediction?

The answer requires more than knowing that an AI system has received FDA authorization.

Patients—and their physicians—need to ask:
What exactly is the AI predicting, and how reliable is it?

An AI-generated risk estimate is not a crystal ball. It represents a probability based on the data used to develop and validate the system.

Was the AI tested in people like me?

This is particularly important when we consider health disparities. Men of African descent have historically been underrepresented in many prostate cancer clinical trials and research studies, despite carrying a substantially higher burden of prostate cancer.

If populations are inadequately represented when an AI system is developed and validated,can we assume its predictions will be equally reliable for everyone?

We shouldn't.

And there is another equity question:
Who has access to the technology and care needed to act on its results?

A sophisticated AI prediction has limited value if a patient cannot access the pathology expertise, diagnostic testing, specialists or treatments needed to turn that information into better care.

The Prostate Net's position:
We don't believe patients should be either AI evangelists or AI skeptics.

We should be asking better questions:
What does the AI actually do?
What evidence supports it?
Was my population adequately represented?
How accurate is it for people like me?
Will it change my treatment or outcomes?
And can I actually access it?

AI has enormous potential to advance precision medicine.

But the goal should never be AI for AI's sake.

The goal is better information, better decisions—and ultimately better outcomes for every patient, regardless of race, geography or ability to pay.

Read the article at:
https://oncodaily.com/not-to-miss/fda-ai-enabled-medical-devices-568291

We Inform to fight!
Because informed patients change outcomes.

FDA Lists More Than 1,500 AI-Enabled Medical Devices as Oncology Applications Expand / AI-Enabled Medical Devices, cancer, cancer care, FDA, OncoDaily,

08/19/2026

Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) account for nearly 60% of adults' and 70% of children's energy intake in the United States.

These industrially manufactured products – such as soft drinks, packaged cereals and snacks, and processed meats – are made with refined fats, oils, sugars, starches, salts and other additives that can enhance flavor, texture, and shelf life while reducing nutritional value.

Growing evidence links higher consumption of UPFs to a range of health problems. Research has identified several potential biological pathways through which UPFs may contribute to cancer. These include metabolic disruption, inflammation, oxidative stress, and changes to the gut microbiome.

Now, new research from Florida Atlantic University's Charles E. Schmidt College of Medicine provides evidence that men with higher consumption of UPFs have increased risks of prostate cancer. In the U.S., prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and the second-leading cause of cancer death among men after lung cancer.

"Reducing consumption of UPFs is a complex public health challenge, particularly given how prevalent and accessible these products are."

Read the article at:

Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) account for nearly 60% of adults' and 70% of children's energy intake in the United States.

08/14/2026

The Fogarty Global Health Training Program provides one-year mentored research fellowship opportunities in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) for pre- and post-doctoral candidates from the U.S. and LMICs.

This program is sponsored by the Fogarty International Center (FIC) and several collaborating Institutes and Centers at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

The program supports research in areas of interest, including: HIV/AIDS, non-communicable diseases, mental health, maternal and child health and nutrition, and more.

The application deadline for the 2027-2028 year is
September 25, 2026.

This fellowship is aimed at early career development, so candidates who have completed their terminal degree within the past six years will be prioritized. However, recognizing that everyone’s career path is different, you are welcome to apply if you graduated with your terminal degree more than six years ago.

Read the information on application submission requirements at:

Find detailed information on eligibility, application requirements, and step-by-step instructions for applying to the HBNU Fogarty Global Health Training

08/13/2026

The National Cancer Institute’s Investigator-Initiated Early Phase Clinical Trials for Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis program provides R01 funding for clinical research evaluating new or improved approaches to cancer diagnosis and treatment.

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) has established two program announcements for R01 applications to support investigator-initiated clinical trials that are now reissued as:

1. PAR-25-081 (this Notice of Funding Opportunity), which seeks applications for support of early phase (Phase 0, I, and II) medical imaging and oncologic interventional clinical trials relevant to the mission of the NCI's Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (DCTD); and Office of HIV and AIDS Malignancies (OHAM); and

2. PAR-25-167 (companion Notice of Funding Opportunity), which seeks applications for support of cancer prevention and control clinical trials relevant to the missions of NCI's Division of Cancer Prevention (DCP) and NCI's Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences (DCCPS), respectively.

Applicants should be aware of the types of scientific programs that each named NCI Division manages to determine the appropriate NOFO defined above for submission of applications.

Eligibility Criteria:

Public and private institutions of higher education are eligible.
Eligible state, local, tribal, and federal government organizations may apply.
Foreign/non-U.S. organizations are eligible.
Organizations may submit more than one application provided the proposals are scientifically distinct.
New, renewal, resubmission, and revision applications are permitted.
Cost sharing or matching funds are not required.

Funding Details:

Maximum budget: $499,999 in direct costs per year.
Maximum project period: 5 years.
Therefore, a project funded at the maximum annual amount for five years could receive up to $2,499,995 in direct costs.
The number of awards is not predetermined and depends on NIH appropriations and the number of meritorious applications.
Grant Amount: Up to $2,499,995 in direct costs over 5 years

Read the information on submission requirements at:

NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts: National Cancer Institute's Investigator-Initiated Early Phase Clinical Trials for Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (R01 Clinical Trial Required) PAR-25-081. NCI