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 / June 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Has Anyone Noticed??

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Pops - 30 May 2005 13:35 GMT
Did anyone notice?

The Grass is greener today.
The sky is bluer today.
The clouds are fluffierr today.
The flowers smell sweeter today.

I sent for the beginning of a 6.5 week EBRT on Friday PM (5/27), The
team was all there at the cancer center. Intros all around and getting
ready for the Dry Run. My oncologist was there asn just before I went
on the table I asked him if he'd seen the results of the PSA test I had
taken Wednesday. He had not looked so he went to review my paperwork,
In a couple of minutes he returned with a puzzled smile on his face. I
asked him, "What's up"? He said, "your PSA reading is now
'undetectable'" (officially < 0.1). No need for radiation, at least for
the time  being. He was puzzled because it's the first time (in a 35
year career) that he has seen the post op PSA go down (mine was 0.24
four weeks ago) He'll be talking with my Uro and we'll probably do
another one just to make sure.

I got off the table and went home with a big smile on my face. Last
night we partied!

10/03 PSA = 1.24
11/04 PSA = 12.4 1 week later 15.7
Biopsy 12/04 positive, Gleason 3+4 stage 2b
RRP 1/24/05 neg margins, neg lymph glands, neg seminal vesicles
Pathology, two sites, 1 about a dime size the other very,     very
small. Gleason 5

First post-op PSA 5/4/05 = 0.24
Bone scan, CT scan, chest xrays, blood work all negative
EBRT to begin 5/27/05

Second PSA on 5/25 for the purpose of determining the agressiveness of
the remaining cancer. PSA reading < 0.1
Radiation therapy on hold!! Docs are puzzled!

Yahoo!!
Ron B - 30 May 2005 14:05 GMT
Oh Pops!

That's so great!

What a relief it is.

:-)

Great Day Pops,  Celebrate!

Ron B.

Chicago
OCL - 30 May 2005 15:02 GMT
HOORAY!!!!  Good going!  Could be that you just needed
a little more time to clear out that PSA and/or some pesky
PCa cells.  Here's for praying and expecting this to continue!

OCL

> Did anyone notice?
>
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
>
> Yahoo!!
Bill - 30 May 2005 15:37 GMT
"My oncologist was there asn just before I went
on the table I asked him if he'd seen the results of the PSA test I had

taken Wednesday. He had not looked so he went to review my paperwork,"

2 good lessons here: 1. Don't panic over PSA and jump into salvage
treatment. (I would never make any treatment decision based on a single
test.); 2. Don't assume your doctors are on top of your case.

Bill Denton
RP 2/12/02
PSA .45
Memphis
Pops - 31 May 2005 17:09 GMT
Bill,
I was in upper management in "the old days" (I could type better also).
I learned to generate a decision tree for almost every process/problem
I had to manage. I did exactly that for this problem. The second PSA
reading was the gate for salvage treatment (EBRT). If that reading had
been up or the same my decision tree said, "get on the table and turn
on the gun", which I would have done seconds after hearing the reading.

The chances of my reading going down were slim to none according to
both my urologist and oncologist. I am not a guy take chances when it's
not necessary and I had no intention of letting those pesky little
cancer cells multiply any more than absolutely necessary. Be prepared!
My tattoos are permanent so if those pesky little guys return I'm on
that table in a flash.

Now the question to my treatment team is "What the H happened?",  I
expect a cogent answer!

Of course this all happened in the path of a holiday weekend so getting
that team together to talk and hypothesize is problematic. Gotta snap
that whip!
Larry - 30 May 2005 16:02 GMT
Wow Pops, that's fantastic.

There's a good lesson here. Be involved, be a part of the decision process!

> Did anyone notice?
>
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
>
> Yahoo!!
Steve Kramer - 30 May 2005 16:54 GMT
It's been cloudy and rainy all morning, but suddenly the sun is starting to
shine!

Pops, when you first mentioned 0.24, I believe I advised your doc will taken
another PSA before deciding on RT.  I was surprised when he chose to jump on
it at one reading of 0.24.  My doc did not jump on my 0.27 until I had a
0.37 and I considered that aggressive compared to my readings of the time.

You lab may have made a mistake.  Your doc almost certainly did.  But, I
guess a mistake of too aggressive without actual treatment is better than
too laid back.

Signature

PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46
Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c
RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins
PSA  .1  .1  .1  .27  .37  .75
EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47
PSA  .34 .22 .15 .21 .32
Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 (4 mo), 12/03, 4/04, 09/04, 01/05
PSA  .07 .05 .06 .05
non Illegitimi carborundum

> Did anyone notice?
>
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
>
> Yahoo!!
Alan Meyer - 30 May 2005 18:26 GMT
That's outstanding Pops.

I didn't know that could happen.  It's something we should remember
in this group for the next guy that comes out of RP with a small but
not undetectable PSA reading.

It looks now like _watchful_ waiting is in order.  May all your future
PSA readings be undetectable.

   Alan
Steve U - 30 May 2005 23:37 GMT
Pops,
That is truly excellent news! Enjoy!
Steve U
Pops - 02 Jun 2005 14:19 GMT
Another PSA test in two weeks. Uro and Oncologist are assuming that one
of the two readings was wrong.

Well, at least I'm in the 50/50 chance club now!
 
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.