Community Justice and Public Safety: Assessing Criminal Justice Policy Through the Lens of the Social Contract

A reconceptualization of the idea of “community justice” is framed in the logic of the social contract and emphasizes the responsibility of the justice system for the provision of public safety. First, we illustrate the ways in which the criminal justice system has hindered the efforts of community residents to participate in the production of public safety by disrupting informal social networks. Then we turn to an examination of the compositional dynamics of California prison populations over time to demonstrate that the American justice system has failed to meet their obligations to provide public safety by incapacitating dangerous offenders. We argue that these policy failures represent a breach of the social contract and advocate for more effective collaboration between communities and the formal criminal justice system so that all parties can fulfill their obligations under the contract

The Lancet Breast Cancer Commission: tackling a global health, gender, and equity challenge

Breast cancer is an increasing global health, gender, socioeconomic, and equity challenge. In 2020, 2·3 million women were diagnosed with breast cancer and there were 685 000 deaths worldwide.1 Not only is breast cancer the highest incident cancer globally, but it is also the most prevalent, causing more disability-adjusted life-years lost than any other malignancy. Tackling breast cancer is a formidable task for health-care systems, policy makers, and other stakeholders. The numbers of people with metastatic breast cancer who go uncounted are concerning. Cancer registries record patients initially presenting with de-novo metastatic breast cancer, but data on those who develop metastases after a diagnosis of early breast cancer are scarce. In a world focused on breast cancer cure, these uncounted people living with metastatic disease face abandonment and stigma

Prostate cancer early detection

Since the early 1990s when the ACS developed guidelines for the early detection of prostate cancer, many variants of the tPSA assay have been introduced to increase the sensitivity of screening programs (cancer detection) while maintaining specificity (elimination of unnecessary biopsies). Again, the NCCN guidelines recommend how individuals and their physicians can use these new methods rationally for the early detection of prostate cancer. These guidelines are not designed to provide an argument for using early detection programs for prostate cancer, but are meant to provide a vehicle with which early detection efforts can be practiced in an evidence-based, systematic fashion in patients who choose to participate in these programs.56 These NCCN guidelines incorporate many new validated findings in addition to the DRE and tPSA test. These new factors include percent fPSA, PSAV, cPSA, biopsy pathology, and TRUS-guided biopsy techniques. The panel will re-examine the clinical usefulness of these new modalities annually, and the guidelines will be modified accordingly. In addition, future iterations of these guidelines may incorporate new serum markers currently undergoing clinical investigation. The goal of the NCCN and this guideline panel in updating these algorithms is to help men and clinicians choose a program of early detection of prostate cancer and make decisions about the need for prostate biopsy. Any clinician who uses these guidelines is expected to exercise independent medical judgment in the context of the individual clinical circumstances to determine each patient's need for prostate biopsy. These guidelines will continue to evolve as the field of prostate cancer advances. © Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network

Prostate cancer early detection: Clinical practice guidelines in oncology™

Since the early 1990s, many variants of the tPSA assay have been introduced to increase the sensitivity of screening programs (cancer detection) while maintaining specificity (elimination of unnecessary biopsies). Again, these guidelines recommend ways that individuals and their physicians can use these new techniques rationally for early detection of prostate cancer. These guidelines are not designed to provide an argument for using population screening programs for prostate cancer, but are meant to provide a vehicle for practicing early detection efforts in an evidence-based, systematic fashion in patients who choose to participate in these programs. Whether to treat a patient on diagnosis is beyond the scope of these guidelines (see NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Prostate Cancer [in this issue; to view the most recent version of these guidelines, visit the NCCN Web site at www.NCCN.org]). These guidelines incorporate many new validated findings in addition to the DRE and tPSA test, including percent fPSA, PSAV, cPSA, biopsy pathology, and TRUS-guided biopsy techniques. The panel will re-examine the clinical efficacy of these new modalities annually, and the guidelines will be modified accordingly. In addition, future iterations of these guidelines may incorporate new serum markers currently undergoing clinical investigation. The goal of the NCCN and this guideline panel in updating these algorithms is to help men and clinicians choose a program for early detection of prostate cancer and make decisions about the need for prostate biopsy. Any clinician who uses these guidelines is expected to exercise independent medical judgment in the context of the individual clinical circumstances to determine each patient's need for prostate biopsy. These guidelines will continue to evolve as the field of prostate cancer advances. © Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network