Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / October 2005
an interesting thought......
|
|
Thread rating:  |
c palmer - 20 Oct 2005 02:28 GMT i had an MRI done on my knee monday. wasn't given any contrast dye, just stuck in the machine and a set of ear plugs and left alone for the machine to do its job.
they gave me my negatives to take to the bone cutter this friday and i was impressed by the sharpness of all the images.
then, in news on the tv today, they announced a new breakthrough. they are using the newest MRI's to find pancreatic cancer before it has a chance to develop and get a foot hold on the patient. it seems that the MRI can show up cancer tumors that are as small as 2mm that all the other test miss and because pancreatic cancer is a very fast growing cancer, this is the difference between life and death.
now, for the thought. i wonder how soon it would be before they might be able to use the MRI to detect prostate cancer?
the MRI is non invasive. it shows up the smallest details and if it could be used with a contrast agent somehow with the prostate gland, who knows what they phase of early detection we are looking at.
again, just a thought.
~ 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." http://community.webtv.net/PALMER_ENT/doc
ron - 20 Oct 2005 03:14 GMT c palmer wrote...snip...
> i wonder how soon it would be before they might be able to use the MRI to > detect prostate cancer? Curtis...It is used today, particularly to assess ECE. Google "endorectal MRI"...best wishes and good health, Ron
Robert - 21 Oct 2005 01:08 GMT It's also used to follow up on suspicious bone scans...
>c palmer wrote...snip... >> i wonder how soon it would be before they might be able to use the MRI to >> detect prostate cancer? > > Curtis...It is used today, particularly to assess ECE. Google > "endorectal MRI"...best wishes and good health, Ron Dick Smith - 20 Oct 2005 06:02 GMT I thought I read somewhere that the MRI can do a better detection at breast cancer also. I guess it all comes down to expense and availability of the procedure.
Howard and Hope - 21 Oct 2005 01:29 GMT MRI, Can it be used if Pacemaker has been removed BUT leads are still in heart???? Howie
Alan Meyer - 21 Oct 2005 03:46 GMT > MRI, Can it be used if Pacemaker has been removed BUT leads are still in > heart???? Howie Good question. When I had my MRI I had to fill out a form asking about metal in my body. It specifically asked about metal braces, plates, pacemakers and bullets (!). I was told the fillings in my teeth were okay and, fortunately, I've never been shot or had any of those other things put in.
Alan
c palmer - 21 Oct 2005 08:58 GMT Howard and Hope wrote: MRI, Can it be used if Pacemaker has been removed BUT leads are still in heart???? Howie
Good question. When I had my MRI I had to fill out a form asking about metal in my body. It specifically asked about metal braces, plates, pacemakers and bullets (!). I was told the fillings in my teeth were okay and, fortunately, I've never been shot or had any of those other things put in. Alan ======== howie - you will have to ask the tech doing the MRI about your question. he will have the answer.
when i filled out that questionnaire that alan was talking about, i mentioned that i had a piece of iron that got stuck in the my eye, right smack dab in the middle of the iris. if you can imagine, they numb the eye and stained it with a black light dye. the eye had started to ulcerate around the iron pieces and they had to hold my eye lid open and use a hypo needle to "dig" out the iron filings. you could see the needle coming right at you and stick you in the eye. the doctor told me to be perfectly still because one move and i would be permanently blind.
well, here it is 30 years later and i answer their questionnaire. the tech asked me about these filings - if they got them all. why? because he said i would most certain be blinded for good if anything was left behind and they were going to do a skull x-ray to make sure.
~ 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." http://community.webtv.net/PALMER_ENT/doc
Steve Kramer - 21 Oct 2005 23:10 GMT Bullets!?!? I'm almost positive they are not susceptable to magnets. Copper and lead.
 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
> > MRI, Can it be used if Pacemaker has been removed BUT leads are still in > > heart???? Howie [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Alan Brian - 30 Oct 2005 21:25 GMT > Bullets!?!? I'm almost positive they are not susceptable to magnets. > Copper and lead. As a Useless Data Point, bullet composition also includes copper-over-steel. American/European manufacturers do this under the caption of being "armor piercing", fSovUnion did it because it was cheap.
Google "steel core ammo" (yahoo works as well).
Steve Kramer - 21 Oct 2005 23:08 GMT Yes, I believe so. I don't know how. It doesn't seem possible to me. But, my sister in law had to get one every now and then for her head problems and she has a shunt in her head. They just "reprogram" the MRI.
 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
> MRI, Can it be used if Pacemaker has been removed BUT leads are still in > heart???? Howie J - 20 Oct 2005 09:48 GMT > then, in news on the tv today, they announced a new breakthrough. they > are using the newest MRI's to find pancreatic cancer before it has a > chance to develop and get a foot hold on the patient. it seems that the > MRI can show up cancer tumors that are as small as 2mm that all the > other test miss and because pancreatic cancer is a very fast growing > cancer, this is the difference between life and death. It's also a "silent" cancer. Usually no symptoms until too late for surgery.
There's no reliable blood test and it's usually diagnosed late when a person has lost a lot of weight. They can't be MRI'ing everyone, in the world, every 3 months. That's just not possible.
Good luck with your knee, curtis, J
c palmer - 20 Oct 2005 11:50 GMT It's also a "silent" cancer. Usually no symptoms until too late for surgery. There's no reliable blood test and it's usually diagnosed late when a person has lost a lot of weight. They can't be MRI'ing everyone, in the world, every 3 months. That's just not possible. Good luck with your knee, curtis, J ====== hi j - i agree with your logic. but i forgot to add in my post when i wrote it that the news article said they were only doing the risk cases for pancreatic cancer.
also, i forgot to mention that only the MRI's built in the last 5 years has this capability, which greatly reduces the places that can do this type of screening.
~ 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." http://community.webtv.net/PALMER_ENT/doc
J - 21 Oct 2005 00:53 GMT > It's also a "silent" cancer. Usually no symptoms until too late for > surgery. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > wrote it that the news article said they were only doing the risk cases > for pancreatic cancer. Hello Curtis, The risks still cover a lot of people... http://pathology2.jhu.edu/pancreas/RISKFACT.cfm We would have to figure out how many people those risks cover vs 40,000 diagnosed in the US/year and multiply the cost of 4 screenings a year for the former group (number).
> also, i forgot to mention that only the MRI's built in the last 5 years > has this capability, which greatly reduces the places that can do this > type of screening. I think this is the news item you are referring to. <http://www.spectroscopynow.com/coi/cda/detail.cda?id=7415&type=Feature&chId=3&page=1>
Looks to me that they've had false positives. Also looks to me that their intent is to screen those with abdominal pain. Unfortunately, there's lots of other possible reasons for abdominal pain and
Unfortunately, not all pancreatic cancers present with abdominal pain. My friend's brother had no symptoms at all (or none that said "pay attention, something's wrong"), until he woke up one day and realized how much weight he'd lost. Another patient on alt.support.cancer (a few years back), told me that the first sign he had was mild back pain, which he ignored.
Strides are being made. The son of a gallbladder cancer patient posted today that his father died. Often the prognosis of gallbladder cancer is around 6 months, but he had extensive surgery including a Whipple, which resects part of the pancreas thereby slowing down/preventing the gallbladder cancer from spreading. As a result he lived a year longer than I would have expected. Better than 6 months, which if I recall correctly is the median expected survival. So some progress is being achieved (where possible) in one of 3 fast-moving cancers (pancreatic, gallbladder and bile duct cancer) J
42n8-1 - 20 Oct 2005 22:52 GMT i had a rectal mri before my rrp surgury at the university of penn.in september of this year. it is one of the tests that dr. wein sets up before he goes in.
> i had an MRI done on my knee monday. wasn't given any contrast dye, > just stuck in the machine and a set of ear plugs and left alone for the [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > invariably fatal. Prostate cancer is only sometimes so." > http://community.webtv.net/PALMER_ENT/doc Alan Meyer - 20 Oct 2005 23:23 GMT > i had a rectal mri before my rrp surgury at the university of penn.in > september of this year. it is one of the tests that dr. wein sets up before > he goes in. The clinical trial I was in was for the purpose of testing endorectal MRI as an imaging system for guiding HDR brachytherapy. They did a dry run (MRI, no radiation) to image everything and the doctor and computer guy showed me the images they got. I was amazed at the clarity of the images, and also disturbed at the size and position of the tumor that showed up. It was big and right against the wall of the prostate capsule, maybe penetrating slightly beyond it. I could see orders of magnitude more detail than anything that showed up on the ultrasound test my uro had done at the biopsy.
They also imaged the lymph nodes and seminal vesicles, but nothing showed up. They told me anything bigger than 2mm would show and couldn't guarantee that there weren't smaller tumors in there, but at least the outcome there was hopeful.
For the actual treatments, they did the MRI again, in real-time, mapping out the prostate, inserting treatment catheters (plastic sleeves through which the radioactive isotope would be inserted) then imaging some more, inserting more, etc. Then they finally put me in a room with a robot that administered the radiation. Or at least that's what they tell me, I slept through the whole thing.
We don't know yet how the trial will turn out. Last I heard, one guy out of 14 had opted for ADT, but the rest of us are still hoping for success. The guy who opted for ADT might or might not have failed treatment since it seems that many of the patients are getting big PSA "bounces" (seems to be a problem with HDR brachytherapy).
Unfortunately, as with so many clinical trials, 14 is not a big number and doesn't allow anyone to draw clear conclusions about the efficacy of the treatment, but the NCI was unable to recruit any more patients for the trial.
So we have some evidence that MRI guided radiation is good, but not enough to know whether it's an advance on other techniques.
Alan
Brian - 30 Oct 2005 21:54 GMT > So we have some evidence that MRI guided radiation is good, but > not enough to know whether it's an advance on other techniques. > > Alan Where was this done, Alan? Are new Lab-Rats still sought?
|
|
|