Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / October 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Salvage Radiation <0.01

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Dave P - 26 Oct 2004 14:49 GMT
Had a dream last night that my psa test came back 0.79 and it seemed so
real.

My Doc reported to me just now that my test came back <0.01

17 months since last IMRT treatment.

Again I thank God and all those that have helped me through this battle.

I am very happy for all those whose PSA tests come back favorably, pray and
cheer for those that are struggling, and for all of us to remember, never
give up, never lose hope.

Dave P
-----------------------------------------
Age at Diagosis 46

Regular Physical Exam 6.30.02 = PSA 4.6 Free PSA 8%

Biopsy 8.1.02 =  1 core out of 16 positive for PCa <5% of core TC1
Gleason  3+3=6

RP 10.15.02

Path Report = Positive Margin Right Apex 4mm, no lymph node invasion, no
seminal vesicle involvement
Cancer found throughout the prostate
Gleason 3+4=7

12.04.02    PSA Test <0.1

02.24.03.  PSA Test                 0.3
03.01.03   PSA Test confirming 0.3

03.24.03   Bone Scan, MRI = Negative

03.31.03   Started Salvage Radiation 68.400 gy - 40 Treatments - IMRT 7
Angles
05.23.03   Ended  Salvage Radiation

07.01.03 PSA =   0.04
10.01.03 PSA = <0.01
04.01.04 PSA = <0.01
10.26.04 PSA = <0.01

Dave P.
ButtercupsDad@dog.net - 26 Oct 2004 17:14 GMT
Dave:
  Congratulations on the undetectable reading.  Wishing you many more
in the years to come.
  November 1st is my next visit to the uro for PSA, and I am getting
nervous.
  Thank you.
David S.

>Had a dream last night that my psa test came back 0.79 and it seemed so
>real.
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
>
>Dave P.
MH - 26 Oct 2004 22:46 GMT
Congratulations on the good news, Dave!! I wish you many, many more of those
undetectable results.  I have one coming up soon, and I'm dreading it, as
usual....

MikeH

> Had a dream last night that my psa test came back 0.79 and it seemed so
> real.
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> Dave P
dale.j. - 26 Oct 2004 23:55 GMT
> Congratulations on the good news, Dave!! I wish you many, many more of those
> undetectable results.  I have one coming up soon, and I'm dreading it, as
> usual....
>
> MikeH

Dave, wish you well.  A trip we all don't want to make, but we did it
anyway.

Mines coming up in Dec.

Cool it Mike it'll be ok!!!

Holidays are are on the way.

All the best

Dale J.

P.S. remember Mike we still have to write a book about all this in the
snow, LOL.

> > Had a dream last night that my psa test came back 0.79 and it seemed so
> > real.
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> >
> > Dave P

Signature

Email:  dalej2@mac.com

kastons - 26 Oct 2004 23:54 GMT
Great news!!  Congratulations.

I go for my 2nd Post-RP PSA in a few weeks.  Getting nervous....

Sandy K.

> Had a dream last night that my psa test came back 0.79 and it seemed so
> real.
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
>
> Dave P.
John Loomis - 27 Oct 2004 01:38 GMT
Very Cool!  Good for you!
we do not like the always......hanging over our heads.......(PSA) test.
I have done it now for 5 years, and my Doctor, said, "John, you should get
tested every year now!" not at 6 months.
I am happy, and am happy for you too!
John Loomis.  no prostate.......no cancer so far.............Can live with
that aspect.
> Had a dream last night that my psa test came back 0.79 and it seemed so
> real.
[quoted text clipped - 43 lines]
>
> Dave P.
Steve Kramer - 27 Oct 2004 11:34 GMT
WOW!  1/100th of a nanogram.  Can't find that with a search warrant!

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 G7 (3+4), T3bN0M0
PSA  .1  .1  .1  .27  .37  .75
EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47
PSA  .34 .22 .15 .21 .32
Lupron (1 mo) 07/21/2003 @ 48
PSA  .07 .05 .06
Lupron (3 mo) 8/03 (48), 12/03, 4/04 (49), 09/04 (50)
non illegitimi carborundum

> Had a dream last night that my psa test came back 0.79 and it seemed so
> real.
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
>
> Dave P.
Alan Meyer - 27 Oct 2004 17:18 GMT
Dave,

Congratulations on the PSA numbers.

> 03.31.03   Started Salvage Radiation 68.400 gy - 40 Treatments -
> IMRT 7 Angles
> 05.23.03   Ended  Salvage Radiation

It sounds like your doctors are being very aggressive in
their attack on the cancer.  68.4 grays is very close to the
full dose that anyone gets who has a prostate and is
getting radiation as a primary treatment.

Your doctors probably radiated a good size area
around the prostate bed, with a good dose - and a
consequently excellent chance of killing any cancer
still in the area.

Good luck.

   Alan
Dave P - 28 Oct 2004 02:37 GMT
Thanks Alan,

As well as to the rest of the group members.

My surgeon wanted my to go as high as 72 gray. He stated that would be best.
He just returned from a conference at the time and learned that the more
radiation the better, whether it was salvage, adjuvant or primary treatment.
He wasn't concerned about side effects - he wanted to kill the cancer.

My Rad/Onc wouldn't go for it. He stated that problems would occur around
70-72 gy.

I had to really lobby for the 68gy

He stated it would be plenty and as you stated 68gy was the dose given years
ago - for men with a prostate - and some still give that dose.

I consider myself lucky and fortunate.

Things could of gone the otherway and still could go the otherway.

The members of this group were and still are a blessing.

Best wishes.

Dave P

> Dave,
>
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
>     Alan
Bill Denton - 28 Oct 2004 14:48 GMT
A rad-onc at M.D. Anderson recommended 70 gy to me for salvage RT.

Could some of you who have had salvage EBRT please describe the
simulation process and treatment in detail? Or post a link to a site
that does?

Bill Denton
RP 2/12/02
Memphis
Alan Meyer - 28 Oct 2004 21:11 GMT
> A rad-onc at M.D. Anderson recommended 70 gy to me for salvage RT.
> ...

One factor in the dosage is how the radiation is administered.
Dave got IMRT - which is the kind that focusses the xrays most
effectively on the target.

I know that for men with prostates, current thinking is that
72-74 grays is desirable.  However I think those numbers
were derived from data generated before the IMRT era.
If IMRT is, say, 5% more focussed than earlier types of
administration, then 68 grays would equal:

  68 x 1.05 = 71.4 equivalent.

If it's 10% more effective, then we get:

  68 x 1.10 = 74.8 equivalent.

This is pure speculation on my part.  I have no idea whether
IMRT is 5% more effective, whether IMRT is better at all
for salvage radiation, or whether radiation of a man without
a prostate requires fewer rads than for a man with a prostate.
I don't even know if the experts know, or what their theories
are.

I do know however that different ways of administering
radiation do require different dosages.  I got:

   46 grays of 3DCRT external beam
   21 grays of HDR brachytherapy.

The total is only 67 grays - below the current standard
EBRT dose.

However, brachytherapy concentrates all the radiation in the
prostate - within a few millimeters of the seeds.  None
of it is intercepted by the skin or other organs on the way in.
I tried to find out what the equivalent was in external beam
radiation.  I only found one study that compared them and it
seemed to imply that one gray of HDR equalled 2.5 grays of
external beam.  That would make my treatment equal to:

   46 + (2.5 x 21) = 98.5 equivalent

Permanent seeds give even more since the radiation is
administered slowly, but over a very long time.

But the science on all of this appears to be still very much
in progress.  By the time our sons need it, all of this should
be much better understood and methods of administration
should be even more advanced.

   Alan
Dave P - 28 Oct 2004 22:29 GMT
Hi Bill,

Good luck with your treatment. It really is a breeze.

Alan is right about IMRT. The Doc told me at one point in time that some of
my prostate was getting well above 70+ gy.

I didn't have any long term side effects.

It's kind of fuzzy remembering now.

The simulation was basically taking a bunch of xrays from the IMRT machine
lying down. I believe I did the preparation work on two separate days. One
for xrays and the next when they mark you for positioning.

I remember them putting the catheter in and injected some fluid into it -
the prostate area. That is the worst part of it. It goes by quickly. They
then took numerous xrays from the IMRT machine. .

They then marked me up with a pen and did some light tatoo work of which you
couldn't find on my body now with a magnifying glass now.

They than took more Xrays on the IMRT machine.

They told me to come back in a week.

They then explained that 7 angle IMRT with 68,400 gy would be best for me.

I started on Monday. They took more pictures and then I received my first 7
angle treatment lasting about 10-20 minutes.

After that is was the same thing daily, weekly, monthly. IMRT 7 angles 10-20
minutes per session. Little waiting. Great supportive people.

I exercised, drank alot of water and took some naps. Never really got tired
like they said I would.

If your getting 70gy your right on target. Thats exactly what my Surgeon
wanted me to get.

That's about all I can add. The only tough part was the catheter. The rest
was easy.

Good luck.

Dave P.

The thing that bothered me the most was that they put the catheter back
> A rad-onc at M.D. Anderson recommended 70 gy to me for salvage RT.
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> RP 2/12/02
> Memphis
Bill Denton - 29 Oct 2004 17:29 GMT
"I remember them putting the catheter in and injected some fluid into
it -
the prostate area. That is the worst part of it. It goes by quickly."

That's what I was afraid of. So, are you laid out like a naked
Thanksgiving turkey for all of this? My chances of cure are rather
small so I just may skip the whole thing if it sounds like too much of
an ordeal. My PSA was at .37 then down to .30 for awhile and the last
one was .37 again. I am overdue for another one but I started on
Celebrex and I want to give it a full 3 mos. to see if it has any
effect. If I'm still under .40, I will probably give it another 3 mos.

The rad-onc at M.D. Anderson said that there was no reason to have the
much more expensive IMRT as salvage RT.

I don't think RT as primary Tx is the same thing as salvage so I would
caution anyone from applying facts on one to the other.

Bill Denton
RP 2/12/02
Memphis
Alan Meyer - 29 Oct 2004 19:58 GMT
> "I remember them putting the catheter in and injected some fluid into
> it -
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Celebrex and I want to give it a full 3 mos. to see if it has any
> effect. If I'm still under .40, I will probably give it another 3 mos.
...

Bill,

If you think you may still have cancer and salvage radiation
may cure it, please don't "skip the whole thing" because it sounds
like too much of an ordeal.

It's really not that much of an ordeal at all.  It's all entirely
painless and the side effects are pretty mild.  When you get
radiation you lie still on a gurney under the machine, you hear
some buzzing, you feel nothing at all.  Where I got it, they even
had me bring in my own CDs to listen to the music of my choice
while they were going through the routine.

If someone told me that radiation would give me a 25%
chance of avoiding death by prostate cancer, I'd go for
it in a heartbeat.

> The rad-onc at M.D. Anderson said that there was no reason to have the
> much more expensive IMRT as salvage RT.
>
> I don't think RT as primary Tx is the same thing as salvage so I would
> caution anyone from applying facts on one to the other.

I imagine you're right about that.  I believe that one difference
between primary and salvage therapy is that the target area
for salvage may be larger - going after the areas around the
prostate as well as the prostate itself.  Perhaps the more precise
targetting possible with IMRT is less important.

Unfortunately, I don't think anyone has certain knowledge
of any of this.  After radiation they don't cut people up to
find out what the effect was on the organs, so all they have
to work with is statistical data from years afterward about
the effects on PSA and cancer death - statistics that can
be influenced by dozens of different factors.

  Alan
Dave P - 30 Oct 2004 02:13 GMT
Bill,

The catheter procedure was no ordeal at all.

The Doc just tells you to pull down your pants. You lay on the table - your
covered with a sheet at all times. Before you know it - it's over. The
process took less than 5 minutes. I was worried as hell when I went in. I
told my wife that it was a piece of cake when I came out of the room. No
discomfort - nothing. The thought of it was more stressful than the actual
procedure.

The prostate biopsy I got two years ago was10x worse.

As for the radiation treatments. I did get to pick out my music. Even
brought in some slow jazz music of my own. One time they had to shake me to
wake me up as I almost dozed off. They had a big laugh over that one.

Most people and Dr's told me that my PCa metastasized. I felt the same as
you. What's the use. The literature and most people I talked with stated
that the radiation would be of little or no use.  If it wasn't for the Sloan
Kettering Doctor I talked to - months before the rise in psa - that stated
to me "that PCa in alot men will stay local in the prostate bed for years
before there is any distant metastis"

The study that recently came out a couple months ago reported that Salvage
has a greater cure rate than ever thought. It also reported great long term
results for men with a high gleason scores.

What a golden opportunity you have if your psa is still low. Don't be
suprised if your psa becomes undetectable and stays there.

All the doctors I talked with stated that it really didn't matter what type
of radiation I received -IMRT, 3DCRT- as long as the dose was at least
68gy - up to 72gy.

If your still under .4 in 3 months that is a great indication that it could
be local as distant is known to rise/increase much quicker.

Dave P

> "I remember them putting the catheter in and injected some fluid into
> it -
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
> RP 2/12/02
> Memphis
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.