On January 29, Clarence Crow wrote, in pertinent part:

(su-nip)

Helluva good question.

Apparently, if the medics are correct, Clarence progressed from T2a, the
tumor involving half of a lobe or less, to T2c, the tumor involving both
lobes, in just three months. I cannot make sense of this, even given the
aggressiveGleason scores of 8 and 7. I'd be very surprised if the tumor
progressed all that much in three months. But what were the percentages
of tumor in the specimens?

On the other paw, there's a great deal of subjectivity in clinical
staging. Some, probably most, medics just tell us to bend over and have
at us. Others, Strum for example, will have the patient assume various
positions and spend quite a while feeling around. He sez he uses plenty
of K-Y.

But that leaves us -- and C -- with the open question: how did the new
rad onc arrive at the T2c staging if no further examination had been
performed???

I recommend that C demand a satisfactory answer from the medic.

Regards,

Steve J
__
"Well, I've wrestled with reality for thirty-five years, Doctor, and I'm
happy to state I finally won out over it."
-- James Stewart as Elwood P. Dowd in "Harvey"

Not that this is particularly enlightening.....but when Ron was diagnosed as
T2B (one lobe more than half tumour, IIRC).....but the rad onc told us that
up to the year 2000, he would have been T2A.  The reason being that they had
changed the staging classifications, or some such.

Perhaps one of the group could explain this.  Just one of those odd things
that I remember from 18 months ago.

Heather

For all other than Steve Jordan:

Regardless of PAST statistics on changes to Staging Measurement
methods. they don't address the time frame to which I  referred.

In fact they seem to "Fray the Thread" around the edges, similar to
"poor differentiation" mentioned in Biopsy Reports on G4 & G5 cores.

If we have an A 3 months ago and a C now without any Valid
substantiation by further Examination , it wouldn't matter what Scale
of Measurement was employed, provided it was the same in both
instances.

-- Reader to complete...
-- Please reply to this ng as my email adress is fake:

-- Regards

-- CC

...

My story.  

2002, I clock a PSA 9+ and my primary care doc says, "I can't feel
anything, go see this guy, he's a top urologist."

The uro-doc can't feel anything either but does a 6 core biopsy
which comes back negative.   He's not sure but says that some
guys just have numbers like that.

2004, I clock a PSA 10+.  My primary care doc says, go back to the
the urologist, "you are outside/beyond my area of expertise."

I'm thinking that it's not a big deal.

Again, the uro can't DRE anything but says, "Let's do another
biopsy."

dang.

This time he does 12 cores and finds the cancer in 1 core. 5% sticks
in my mind.  "aggressive though", he says.

So I go to a rad-oncologist, get imaged up the wazoo, so to speak.

The rad doc says, "You're an unusual case, most tumors form to the
back, yours is toward the front."  That's why it can't be felt.

So the Uro-doc's calling T1, could not feel a thing, detected by
PSA and biopsy.

The rad-doc's high-tech imaging shows "something" toward the front
and on the left side.  Is that a T2a?  

The Rad doc calls it T3.  Aggressive, near the front, very
close to the capsule, possible penetration.  

Both docs hit it with everything they have, Lupron, IMRT,
Palladium-103.    

PSA 10+
PSA 1.3  after 3 months of Lupron
PSA 0.8  after 4 months of Lupron and half the IMRT.
PSA <0.1 2 months after seeding, 7 months Lupron.

T1, T2, or T3?  It's subjective.  

What matters is the PSA <0.1,  That's the first reading post
treatment.  The next one will be late March.  

We'll see.