Testicular cancer: What are the signs to look out for and how do you check you have it?
Testicular cancer may be rare, but it's the most common form of cancer facing young men.
It's also one of the most treatable cancers if it's caught early. Survival rates are high, with 95 per cent of men under age 45 surviving at least five years after diagnosis, European data shows.
But because there are few symptoms, men may not realise they have testicular cancer, leading to delays in diagnosis that can make treatment more complicated.
Part of the problem is that 'there is no self-examination culture' due to social 'taboos,' said Dr Hendrik Van Poppel, a urologist on the board of the European Association of Urology (EAU) and co-chair of the inequalities network hosted by the European Cancer Organisation.
Related
'Who knew a pair of undies could hold so much power': New underwear labels to raise cancer awareness
With Testicular Cancer Awareness Month in full swing, here's what you need to know to take charge of your health.
Who is at risk of testicular cancer?
Testicular cancer affects about one in every 250 men in Europe, and it's the most common cancer among those
under age 45
. Diagnoses peak in the late 20s and early 30s.
Some men are at higher risk of testicular cancer, including those with a family history of it, men with HIV or fertility problems, white men, and those with cryptorchidism.
Cryptorchidism is a condition where the testicles do not descend into the scrotum, which they normally do around the time a baby boy is born. About
5 to 10 per cent
of men with testicular cancer had the condition, which can be fixed with surgery, as a child.
What are the signs of testicular cancer?
Van Poppel told Euronews Health that young men and teenage boys should do self-examinations while in a warm shower or bath, when the scrotum is relaxed. Check each testicle separately for lumps or changes.
Related
World Cancer Day: Forever chemicals in tap water might cause cancer to spread, study finds
According to the EAU
, most changes you might find during a self-exam are not cancer. But if you find a small, painless lump in the testicle it could be serious, so follow up with a doctor.
Other warning signs include a testicle getting bigger or painful, or the scrotum feeling firm, hard, heavy, or achy, the
UK National Health Service (NHS) said.
Pain in your back or lower stomach, losing weight, having a cough or a hard time breathing or swallowing, and a sore chest can all be symptoms as well.
What is life like after a testicular cancer diagnosis?
Treatment typically involves surgery to remove the testicle, sometimes followed by chemotherapy or radiation. Some people opt to get an artificial testicle put in to replace the one they lost in surgery, according to the NHS.
Related
Men with higher quality sperm may have longer lifespan, new study finds
Some testicular cancer treatments can affect fertility, meaning it could be harder to have children. Before beginning treatment, you may want to consider storing and banking your sperm, which could be used for fertility treatments in the future.
If the cancer has spread to other parts of the body, it can be harder to treat. In that case, doctors may offer more intensive treatments or palliative care to manage your symptoms as long as possible.
ADVERTISEMENT
The bottom line, Van Poppel said, is that testicular cancer doesn't have to be a death sentence.
'Many of these guys who are discovered late, even metastatic, can be cured,' Van Poppel said. 'But the main goal should be timely detection'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
2 hours ago
- Euronews
EU Commission unlocks health funds but leaves civil society reeling from cuts
The European Commission this week finally unveiled its 2025 work programme for its €571 million health budget, EU4Health—a flagship initiative launched in response to the COVID-19 pandemic to strengthen public health across the bloc. The publication ended months of uncertainty and delay, with deep funding cuts already severely impacting NGOs and civil society groups operating in the health sector. A Commission spokesperson attributed the delay to several factors including the transition to the new Commission that took office in December 2024 and digestion of updated mission letters for commissioners, which came in September last year. The need to adjust for earlier budget reallocations was also cited, notably a €1 billion diversion from EU4Health to support Ukraine, announced in February 2024. But more troubling for health NGOs is what the new programme confirms: a complete elimination of operating grants - funds that support an organisation's core operations - leaving only action grants, which finance specific projects. 'It does not mean that NGOs will not be able to directly participate. It's just that we are doing the funding now differently,' a Commission spokesperson told Euronews, referring to this new focus on action grants rather than operational ones. But for these organisations, what may appear to be a mere bureaucratic adjustment actually represents a significant structural shift, as much of their core work—such as on digital health and air pollution—does not easily fit into isolated, time-limited projects. Civil society left in 'survival mode' The delay to unveiling the work programme left health civil society organisations already unable to plan or secure interim financing, resulting in staff reductions and suspended operations. 'The absence of operating grants has pushed many in our sector into survival mode, especially for us, as a large organisation that has historically relied on them,' Milka Sokolović, director general of the European Public Health Alliance (EPHA), told Euronews. As one of the largest health-focused civil society groups in Europe, EPHA has been forced to cut its staff by 40% this year due to the uncertainty and reduced funding. It's not alone. EURORDIS, the European organisation representing patients with rare diseases, also criticised the cuts. 'It's deeply regrettable that the EU4Health 2025 Work Programme not only confirms the exclusion of operating grants for health NGOs, but also provides few – if any – alternative funding opportunities for civil society,' said Virginie Bros-Facer, CEO of EURORDIS. "Over the past 20 years, DG SANTE [the Commission's health service] has recognised the value of operating grants as the only funding mechanism that ensures meaningful interaction between civil society and EU institutions," said Florence Berteletti from the European Alcohol Policy Alliance. She added that operating grants represent only a marginal share of the EU health budget—just 1%. With cuts in operating grants, many of these NGOs are expected to struggle to stay afloat, as they will no longer be able to fulfil essential roles. EU, a shrinking space for civil society The funding shortfall comes amid broader concerns that civil society is being sidelined. Right-wing criticism of the Commission's funding of environmental NGOs has created a climate some see as increasingly hostile to non-profit organisations. For Sokolović, the Commission's funding of NGOs exists to balance the influence of wealthier private lobbies. 'It allows us to act as watchdogs for democracy at a time of democratic backsliding. Without it, commercial interests will dominate EU decision-making, unchecked. And I must say — this goes far beyond health,' she said. The other trend is a reduced space for health actions in the EU's priorities compared to the launch of EU4Health in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, designed as the EU's first standalone health budget, with €5.3 billion allocated to strengthen the sector. But five years on, and in the absence of core support for NGOs, many are now questioning whether public health remains a true EU priority.
Euronews
3 hours ago
- Euronews
EU regulators back twice-yearly HIV injection
European regulators have greenlit a twice-yearly injection to prevent HIV that has been hailed as a game-changer in the course of the epidemic. The jab from the drugmaker Gilead was considered one of the biggest medical breakthroughs of 2024, offering an alternative to daily pills. The drug, called lenacapavir, was 100 per cent effective at preventing the virus in clinical studies. It is a form of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), which works by preventing the virus from replicating and spreading within the body. It reduces the risk of acquiring HIV among both adults and adolescents. Gilead said the European Medicines Agency's (EMA) advisory committee issued a positive opinion of the drug on Friday, clearing the way for the European Commission to approve the drug in the coming months. 'This milestone reflects our commitment to reimagine HIV prevention in Europe and around the world,' Dr Dietmar Berger, Gilead Sciences' chief medical officer, said in a statement. 'Lenacapavir for PrEP has the potential to become a critical tool for public health, helping to expand prevention options for people who face the highest barriers to care'. While there has been progress in the fight against HIV, cases have been rising. In 2023, there were more than 24,700 new HIV diagnoses in the European Union, Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway, up 11.8 per cent from 2022. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also approved the new drug last month. In the EU, Gilead expects to sell it under the name Yeytuo. Gilead has agreed to sell generic versions of the drug in 120 lower-income countries with high HIV rates. But it is not yet clear how widely available it will be after the United States, which has traditionally been a major global health donor, slashed funding earlier this year. The EMA and the European Commission, the EU's executive body, did not immediately reply to requests for comment.
Euronews
a day ago
- Euronews
Many at-home health tests are unclear and unreliable, UK report finds
A slew of at-home medical tests have flooded supermarkets, pharmacies, and wellness shops in recent years, claiming they can identify everything from gluten sensitivity to male fertility without the need for a doctor's visit. But most self-tests sold do not provide clear information about who should use them, how to interpret the results, or what to do next, according to a new pair of studies. Many also contradict formal health guidance, which could be confusing and prompt people to make 'inappropriate' decisions about their health care, the researchers warned. 'We expect [a self-test] to be accurate and we expect it to be evidence-based if it's going to be sold to the general public,' Dr Alex Richter, one of the studies' authors and a professor of clinical immunology at the University of Birmingham, said during a press briefing. 'Unfortunately, we found that many tests gave unclear or at least missing guidance'. Independent experts said the results were alarming, particularly given the booming market for at-home tests, predicted to be valued at hundreds of millions of euros by 2030. But with the abundance of choice, it can be difficult for consumers to pick out high-quality tests from the pack. For the new reports, Richter's team examined 30 self-tests for 19 health issues, including vitamin D deficiency, menopause, blood sugar levels, HIV, bowel cancer, and prostate health. Only 14 tests made statements about their accuracy, eight offered information on the box about who should or should not use the test, and seven told consumers what they should do after taking the test. Sixteen tests explicitly said they were for screening, diagnosis, or monitoring, while another nine did not provide information about the symptoms or risk factors for their use. Nearly all of the tests recommended following up with a doctor if the results were positive or abnormal, the studies found. Two dozen tests claimed they were highly accurate, but the evidence to back up those assertions was either of poor quality or not publicly available, prompting the researchers to raise ethical concerns. Two companies – Newfoundland and Suresign – had the most problematic tests, the research found. They make rapid tests for menopause, vitamin D deficiency, the diagnosis of chronic kidney injury, and to detect thyroid problems. Independent experts said the results should serve as a reminder that at-home tests can be useful, but they should not replace traditional, evidence-based medical care. 'Sometimes people use self-tests because they 'feel it is better to know' and they are trying to inform their health and healthcare decisions,' Dr Amitava Banerjee, a cardiologist and professor of clinical data science at University College London, said in a statement. 'This research shows that these self-tests are often not providing relevant knowledge or information and they are not informing decisions in the right way,' added Banerjee, who was not involved with the studies. The study authors called for more regulation of self-tests, saying they should be thoroughly evaluated before reaching the supermarket or pharmacy shelves to protect consumers and the healthcare system from 'misuse and misinformation'. Richter said the findings should not cause people to cast doubt on all self-tests. At-home pregnancy tests, for example, have been available for many years and are highly reliable when used correctly. And during the COVID-19 pandemic, self-tests were a cheaper, faster way for people to identify infections, easing some of the burden on the health system. 'We think there is a real place for this. … We just need to work out how they can be properly used and assessed,' Richter said. 'We don't want bad tests on the market, we want good tests on the market'.
