This forum is for the discussion of anything to do with Prostate Cancer. There are only four rules:
No fundraisers, no commercials (although it is OK to recommend choices of treatment or medical people based on your personal research; invitations to participate in third-party surveys are also acceptable, provided there is no compensation to YANA);
No harvesting e-mail addresses for Spam;
No insults or flaming - be polite and respectful at all times and understand that there may be a variety of points of view, all of which may have some validity;
Opinions are OK, but please provide as much factual evidence as possible for any assertions that you are making
Failure to abide by these simple rules will result in the immediate and permanent suspension of your posting privileges.
Since this is an International Forum, please specify your location in your post.
Happy Easter to you too Fred from very cold southern England (snowing at the moment).
I agree that David is a case for Active Surveiilance and not surgery (I think I should have stayed on AS longer too). But I distinguish between AS and Watchful Waiting. Active Surveillance for me in his case would obviously involve regular PSA screening to monitor volatility, regular DREs, and as a start (given his family history of Dad and 3 paternal brothers with PC), I would have that pathology of his sliced and re-sliced, coz 2 out of 3 said YES and 1 out of 3 said NO.
I would put a lot more value on the pathological evidence than on any fancy scans.
Happy Easter to you Ted and George(even though I am not a fellow limey, and to rub it in a bit, It is about 70F and bright and sunny with the flowers out in full force here in Alabama.
I would disagree with Ted on one point regarding Dave. I do not believe the biopsy needs to be checked again. Basically its two yes and two no. I understand your reticence to rely on the scan, but with the other data, it is as reliable as another pathologist taking another look. Regardless, the fact that there is such ambivalence regarding is it or isn't it positive, having it checked again would not shed any better light on the situation. The outcome at this time would be the same. Dave has lost confidence (rightly so)in the Dx of PCa. If it were me, I would follow an Active Surveillance routine with regular PSA and DRE. Make changes to lifestyle to inhibit growth of possible PCa and be thankful that he was spared going through treatment at this time.
Have a happy holiday-dont eat too many Easter eggs, Simmel cakes and hot cross buns.
Ted, Fred, Bill, George-I live in Southern California, not far from where the Beach Boys grew up. Its 8 am, I'm at the fire station, and its about 68 degrees with a high expected to be about 75. Thanks for your input. I hope my experience(s) have helped. Happy Easter. Dave
Your experience has been very instructive, David. So has Henk's recent input. I intend to go for one of those scans you talked about if my remaining bit (9.4ml) of prostate shows an upward trend of PSA growth. I shall certainly do that before any more biopsies or any more treatment.
Between me and the insurance company, it cost 20 grand (English pounds that is!) for the robot to cut out 50 grams of prostate and leave nearly 10 behind. That works out at about 2 grand a gram for the left over bit and a PSA of 0.67 last test! So caution is the watchword from now on for this 62 year old!
By the way, David, you live in a glorious part of the world. I took the family to San Diego, La Jolla and Palm Springs last year for a pre-op holiday. Enjoy!