Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / June 2004
Lupron TORPEDOES last PSA!
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Sando - 08 Jun 2004 01:08 GMT In late December with a PSA of almost 30, I had a 30 day shot of Lupron. In early February I had a PSA of 1.7. At that time I had a 4 months' shot of Lupron. The PSA today was < 1. So today he gave me another 4 months worth and said it was working just fine. I asked him about the recent new, targeted drugs, etc. and he just said we'll stay the course we are on now. A variation of, 'If it ain't Broke, don't fix it' da
Sherwin Rubin - 08 Jun 2004 21:59 GMT Lupron is temporary.
Assuming you have no problem with the side effects, there will be a day when the cancer learns how to live with Lupron and then you will have only a few options. When your PSA starts up again it will be chemo and that is not good.
You should do something else now.
Danny McCarty - 09 Jun 2004 19:06 GMT >Subject: Re: Lupron TORPEDOES last PSA! >From: Sherwin Rubin Sherwin@Rubin.net [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >You should do something else now. With a PSA of 30 six months ago, in December, the stuff had probably migrated already. If so, surgery or radiation would not be of much use. It might be a good idea to find a chemotherapy clinical trial, like mine. I get a bone scan and cat scan eight days from now to see if the PCa is still being contained. Lupron will keep Sherwin's cancer under control for a median time of about three or four years from his first Lupron injection.
SIGNATURE File: Ranking the Presidents: 1.Reagan 2.Eisenhower 3.Kennedy 4.Nixon 5.Bush 6.Hoover 7.Truman 8.T.Roosevelt 9.Coolidge 10.Ford 11.Carter 12.McKinley 13.Taft 14.Harding 15.Harrison 16.Clinton 17.Wilson 18.F.Roosevelt 19.Johnson
olfart - 09 Jun 2004 19:37 GMT > >Subject: Re: Lupron TORPEDOES last PSA! > >From: Sherwin Rubin Sherwin@Rubin.net [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > 12.McKinley 13.Taft 14.Harding 15.Harrison 16.Clinton 17.Wilson 18.F.Roosevelt > 19.Johnson Sounds like a good idea Danny. That's why I suggested he get another opinion from an Oncologist. By the way - your sig doesn't say which Bush #5 is. God I hope it isn't..........
Danny McCarty - 09 Jun 2004 19:59 GMT >Subject: Re: Lupron TORPEDOES last PSA! >From: "olfart" olfart65@excite.com [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >By the way - your sig doesn't say which Bush #5 is. God I hope it >isn't.......... Notice that they are all in the twentieth century... that's poppa Bush. I have been an active Republican since I was 12, when I worked for the Chairman of the County Republican Committee. I was going to vote for Kennedy... Johnson is responsible for the useless deaths of 50,000 U.S. soldiers. I knew he would do that, so I voted for Goldwater.
Steve Kramer - 09 Jun 2004 22:06 GMT > >> SIGNATURE File: Ranking the Presidents: 1.Reagan 2.Eisenhower 3.Kennedy > >4.Nixon [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > responsible for the useless deaths of 50,000 U.S. soldiers. I knew he would do > that, so I voted for Goldwater. Uh-oh. When you put Harding ahead of.... well anyone.... I thought it was a joke. I'm bowing out now.
olfart - 09 Jun 2004 22:22 GMT > > >> SIGNATURE File: Ranking the Presidents: 1.Reagan 2.Eisenhower 3.Kennedy > > >4.Nixon [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Uh-oh. When you put Harding ahead of.... well anyone.... I thought it was a > joke. I'm bowing out now. But he never said which direction the ranking goes. Best to worse or vice versa (:>)
Danny McCarty - 10 Jun 2004 02:37 GMT >Subject: Re: Lupron TORPEDOES last PSA! >From: "olfart" olfart65@excite.com [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] >But he never said which direction the ranking goes. Best to worse or vice >versa (:>) Ouch! I'm a damn Republican, excuse my French... I might agree to exchange Harding with Harrison, but that is about all. SIGNATURE File: Ranking the 20th Century Presidents: 1.Reagan 2.Eisenhower 3.Kennedy 4.Nixon 5.Bush 6.Hoover 7.Truman 8.T.Roosevelt 9.Coolidge 10.Ford 11.Carter 12.McKinley 13.Taft 14.Harding 15.Harrison 16.Clinton 17.Wilson 18.F.Roosevelt 19.Johnson
Rgr - 09 Jun 2004 22:43 GMT RANK NAME MEAN GREAT 1 George Washington 4.92 2 Abraham Lincoln 4.87 3 Franklin Roosevelt 4.67 NEAR GREAT 4 Thomas Jefferson 4.25 5 Theodore Roosevelt 4.22 6 Andrew Jackson 3.99 7 Harry Truman 3.95 8 Ronald Reagan 3.81 9 Dwight Eisenhower 3.71 10 James Polk 3.70 11 Woodrow Wilson 3.68 ABOVE AVERAGE 12 Grover Cleveland 3.36 13 John Adams 3.36 14 William McKinley 3.33 15 James Madison 3.29 16 James Monroe 3.27 17 Lyndon Johnson 3.21 18 John Kennedy 3.17 AVERAGE 19 William Taft 3.00 20 John Quincy Adams 2.93 21 George Bush 2.92 22 Rutherford Hayes 2.79 23 Martin Van Buren 2.77 24 William Clinton 2.77 25 Calvin Coolidge 2.71 26 Chester Arthur 2.71 BELOW AVERAGE 27 Benjamin Harrison 2.62 28 Gerald Ford 2.59 29 Herbert Hoover 2.53 30 Jimmy Carter 2.47 31 Zachary Taylor 2.40 32 Ulysses Grant 2.28 33 Richard Nixon 2.22 34 John Tyler 2.03 35 Millard Fillmore 1.91 FAILURE 36 Andrew Johnson 1.65 37 Franklin Pierce 1.58 38 Warren Harding 1.58 39 James Buchanan 1.33
Here's the list from http://www.opinionjournal.com/hail/rankings.html per public opinion poll.
I would say George W. Bush ranks a strong 30 to 33 on this list.
> > >> SIGNATURE File: Ranking the Presidents: 1.Reagan 2.Eisenhower 3.Kennedy > > >4.Nixon [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Uh-oh. When you put Harding ahead of.... well anyone.... I thought it was a > joke. I'm bowing out now. c palmer - 10 Jun 2004 00:06 GMT RANK NAME MEAN GREAT 1 George Washington 4.92 2 Abraham Lincoln 4.87 3 Franklin Roosevelt 4.67 NEAR GREAT 4 Thomas Jefferson 4.25 5 Theodore Roosevelt 4.22 6 Andrew Jackson 3.99 7 Harry Truman 3.95 8 Ronald Reagan 3.81 9 Dwight Eisenhower 3.71 10 James Polk 3.70 11 Woodrow Wilson 3.68 ABOVE AVERAGE 12 Grover Cleveland 3.36 13 John Adams 3.36 14 William McKinley 3.33 15 James Madison 3.29 16 James Monroe 3.27 17 Lyndon Johnson 3.21 18 John Kennedy 3.17 AVERAGE 19 William Taft 3.00 20 John Quincy Adams 2.93 21 George Bush 2.92 22 Rutherford Hayes 2.79 23 Martin Van Buren 2.77 24 William Clinton 2.77 25 Calvin Coolidge 2.71 26 Chester Arthur 2.71 BELOW AVERAGE 27 Benjamin Harrison 2.62 28 Gerald Ford 2.59 29 Herbert Hoover 2.53 30 Jimmy Carter 2.47 31 Zachary Taylor 2.40 32 Ulysses Grant 2.28 33 Richard Nixon 2.22 34 John Tyler 2.03 35 Millard Fillmore 1.91 FAILURE 36 Andrew Johnson 1.65 37 Franklin Pierce 1.58 38 Warren Harding 1.58 39 James Buchanan 1.33 ----------------
i'm an independent because i don't believe that any party holds to what they say. i vote for the person after i research who and what they are.
here are some points to ponder.
1. washington - he was the father of our country in more ways than one.
2. lincoln was not a popular president in office. a lot of people did not go for what he believed in and that was reflected by the action taken against him
3. jefferson has how many children??? they are finding out through DNA that he was not the true blue person everyone thought.
4. george bush is rated as average by that pole, yet in 1991, the polls showed he had an acceptable rating at 91%. the polls said it was the highest ever for a president, yet, one year later, couldn't get enough votes to even get re-elected.
5. ross perot and his running mate. there is a story behind that. it was in the 60's, and there was an american who tried to get help to our pow's using the american red cross. he got the financing and the supplies to make a big red cross delivery, but the shortest route to vietnam was across russia. he ask for permission to go across russian air space in the name of humanity, and the request was refused. at the same this was going on, there was a person name bill clinton over there burning the american flag in protest. well, they finally got the relief supplies to the pow's and here's the rest of the story. the person that put this adventure together was ross perot and one of the pow's he gave supplies to was james stockdale. - his running for vice president. why wasn't that brought out at the election time? it would have been an interesting race. a person who had the highest acceptable rating, an american who tried to help our fighting men, and a draft dodger. well, we know who won that one.
6. bill clinton was caught RED HANDED lying to a grand jury. what would have happened if an everyday person done that? and there was enough evidence to try him for impeachment. yet the poll rated him as "average"
7. if one was applying for a job as the president of a large corporation or a university, they would make sure this person has the qualifications needed in order to operate and do their job as defined by the job description. sure don't want a person to run the corporation into the ground by making bad decisions.
yet, we, the people, will vote for a person who is going to be placed in the highest, most powerful position in terms of world power and represent the united states as a whole, and never once look as to see if they can balance their own checkbook. yet, this person will have the power to approval or veto, BILLIONS of dollars at the drop of a signature. and if that person makes a mistake, who pays, yet what does the voter expect for putting a person in office that was not researched, but voted in because they believed in animal rights, pro rights, or some form of being for or against gun control, just to name a few.
~ curtis
knowledge is power - growing old is mandatory - growing wise is optional "Many more men die with prostate cancer than of it. Growing old is invariably fatal. Prostate cancer is only sometimes so."
Danny McCarty - 10 Jun 2004 02:44 GMT >Subject: Re: Lupron TORPEDOES last PSA! (getting way OT) >From: "Rgr" nopsa_4ever_nospam@yahoo.com [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > >I would say George W. Bush ranks a strong 30 to 33 on this list. I would agree on the first two. F. Roosevelt was lucky, he had WWII. Otherwise he was not acceptable. Hoover did more for the people, actually, he just wasn't so lucky.
That survey should have been taken among the Core of Cadets at Texas A&M. ;-}
SIGNATURE File: Ranking the 20th Century Presidents: 1.Reagan 2.Eisenhower 3.Kennedy 4.Nixon 5.Bush 6.Hoover 7.Truman 8.T.Roosevelt 9.Coolidge 10.Ford 11.Carter 12.McKinley 13.Taft 14.Harding 15.Harrison 16.Clinton 17.Wilson 18.F.Roosevelt 19.Johnson
Steve Kramer - 11 Jun 2004 02:02 GMT I don't know about Lincoln. He did what he had to do, but the war started upon his election, more out of fear what he'd do than anything he actually did. Great speech at Gettysburg though.
FDR? Damn, he was there a long time. Had some real good ideas, too. Shame none of them worked. Did well to win WWII. I wish he'd been around to be on Big Mo. But, he left us with the Red menace. But not "great".
TJ? Now he was great. During his presidency we grew, what? 5 times the size whe had been? Pennsylvania was our west-most state when he went in. We had been to the Pacific and back by the time he left office. Northwest territory. Louisiana Purchase. Some fairly touch international incidents.
And, of course, George Washington. almost certinaly #1.
Agree with the failures. Would add Carter. You gotta like the guy, but total flop as president. Destabilized the world and our economy in 4 years flat.
 Signature Prostate Cancer Survivor (so far), not a doctor PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46 Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c RRP 12/15/2000 PSA .1 .1 .1 .27 .37 .75 EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 Erection 05/12/2003 @ 48 HTbegins 07/21/2003 @ 48 PSA .07 .05 Lupron 7/03, 8/03, 12/03, 4/04
> RANK NAME MEAN > GREAT [quoted text clipped - 76 lines] > a > > joke. I'm bowing out now. Larry - 11 Jun 2004 02:59 GMT Of course, GWB set a new standard in that department!
> Agree with the failures. Would add Carter. You gotta like the guy, but > total flop as president. Destabilized the world and our economy in 4 years > flat. Steve Kramer - 09 Jun 2004 22:03 GMT > > SIGNATURE File: Ranking the Presidents: 1.Reagan 2.Eisenhower 3.Kennedy > 4.Nixon [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > By the way - your sig doesn't say which Bush #5 is. God I hope it > isn't.......... I'm sure it isn't. He was good. But, not as good as his son.
Vernon - 09 Jun 2004 15:09 GMT Your doctor should be kicked in the butt.
Vernon
> In late December with a PSA of almost 30, I had a 30 day shot of > Lupron. In early February I had a PSA of 1.7. At that time I had a 4 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > fix it' > da olfart - 09 Jun 2004 16:25 GMT > In late December with a PSA of almost 30, I had a 30 day shot of > Lupron. In early February I had a PSA of 1.7. At that time I had a 4 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > fix it' > da Have you had a biopsy yet? What is your age and general physical condition? The Lupron will stop the growth of the cancer and lower the PSA for a while, but you need to know the Stage, Gleason Score and the % of cancerous cells in the prostate to make a decision. Does your Dr have special training in oncology or urology or is he just plain MD. RUN-DON'T WALK to an Oncologist MD or a Urologist for a second opinion. Lowering the PSA with Lupron is NOT A Cure, just a part of an overall treatment program be it Surgery or Radiation. Good luck and keep us posted. Age - 69 8/12/02 - PSA 3.7 10/13/03 - PSA 4.69 11/11/03 - PSA 4.8 11/18/03 - Biopsy - 10 cores one core-25% of core-Gleason 4+4=8 all other cores benign tissue 12/10/03 - Consult - Oncologist 12/16/03 - Consult - Radiation Oncologist Treatment Plan - Northeast Ga Cancer Center HT - started 12/17/03 - Eulixen & Lupron (2nd 4 mo Lupron-4/26) 2/10/04 - Started - Flowmax and Megastrol Radiation - IMRT to begin 3/30/04 - 42 treatments - Completed 6/8/04
|
|
|