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.
I was diagnosed with PC on January 21-st 2013. Two of 12 cores ware positive.
Right mid 9+3=6, involving 23% of core length; right lateral Gleason score
3+3=6 involving 9% of core length. Size of the gland 58 cc.
I'm researching radiation treatment - most appropriate for my condition. I am trying to decide between IGRT and Cyberknife. I read that IMRT and IGRT may have fewer side effects compared to Cyberknife, for patients with urinary problems prior to treatment.
I'd greatly appreciate if someone can share his experience with the Cyberknife treatment or express an opinion on this debate.
Good luck and good health to everybody in this forum.
I assume there was a typo where you said Right mid 9+3=6, involving 23% of core length; and that you meant 3+3=6?
As I am sure you are aware, on the basis of what you have posted you are a candidate for Active Surveillance (AS).
In answer to your question as to whether IMRT/IGRT are superior to Cyberknife or vice versa, it can only be said that there are no good long term studies that demonstrate which is better at 'cure' or which has the lowest level of negative consequences. What we do know about all procedures is that the more experienced the operator is, the better the results are likely to be. So it is important to check on the track record of anyone who is going to treat you.
I was puzzled by your comment that radiation treatment was most appropriate for your condition. You have a fairly large gland - about twice the normal size - and a gland like this often is accompanied by urinary issues. The general view is that radiarion tretament may well exacerbate these - or if they are not there initially create them, at least in the shosrt term as the gland reacts to the radiation. I think you need to discuss this with your urologist and gain a clear understanding of to pros and cons of all treatments available to you.
I don't know if you have visited the Yana website and in particular the CHOOSING A TREATMENT page, but suggest you do so and click on the link to the Radiation - External Beam section which Includes: Calypso®: Cyberknife®: Dart®: Prostrcision®: Proton Beam. As to experience of men who have chosen Cyberknife or IMRT/IGRT, I suggest you go to SURVIVORS STORIES and using the filters find the stories of men who chose these therapies.
Finally, can I suggest you read Jon Nowlin's story. He is one of the most thorough researchers and after many years of watching and identifying where his tumour is, has almost decided to choose Cyberknife - if you ask him for his rationale and advice as to how you should proceed, I am sure he will share it with you. His story is here JON NOWLIN
Hope this helps - take your time, don't rush and as always ASSESS STATUS THOROUGHLY BEFORE DETERMINING STRATEGY
