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 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Easier After Five Years

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Steve Kramer - 25 Oct 2005 01:57 GMT
It's time for my annual diatribe on catching prostate cancer.  As usual,
y'all that have been through this with me can click on the next message.

DIAGNOSIS

I have to go back to 1999, because it was then that I did not get the PSA
test that might have saved my life.  My PSA during 1998 must have been
'okay' because the results were never brought to my attention.  During 1999,
I'm sure I would have been diagnosed had I gotten my PSA, but instead I had
a bout of diverticulitis and put off my PSA for a couple of months, then a
few months... next thing I know, I'm having my blood extracted October 17,
2000.  You know where you were when Kennedy was shot?  When the shuttle went
down?  When miniskirts went out of style?  Well, I was sitting in my office,
staring out the door, when the nurse on the other end said, "the doctor
wants to talk to you."  My PSA was 16 and I was sure my dad's disease was
going to kill me by the time I reached 50.

My GP refers me to Peter Shank.  I thought it was a joke, but that's just
what they call Reed L. Shank, III.  Dr. Shank is the best urology surgeon in
the City, or so Cincinnati Magazine says, so I was in good hands... 20% of
which was up my butt within a week.  He told me he felt something funny, but
it didn't sound like "ha ha" funny.  He also told me there was a 33% chance
I had cancer.  He wanted me to have a biopsy.  On November 1, 2000, my
cancer is confirmed.  I was introduced to words like "Gleason," "Stage," and
"Radical Prostatectomy."  Little did I know these would dominate my life for
awhile.

SURGERY

I "opted" for surgery.  I did not really have an option.  Dr. Shank said I
was 46 and that is awful young for this disease (note:  at least 30 on this
NG were younger upon their dx) and surgery is the only choice.

During the first week of December, I took my bride of 25 years on a cruise
for our anniversary.  During the cruise, I kept up a regimen that I had
recently started; walking 17-minute miles for two miles.  Arrived back in
town on our anniversary, December 13.  On December 15, 2005, I walked out of
my house for the last time as a whole man (unless you want to count those
teeth I lost in '71).

When I woke up, I did not open my eyes, but my doc was telling me in
recovery that my cancer was one of the most aggressive he's seen, but he
thinks he got it all.  My post-op biopsy said different.  While I had clean
margins, my seminal vesicles where involved.

A bit of information here;  I was still in the hospital to get my biopsy
results.  The epidural that I still praise long and loudly has one possible
side effect and that is putting to sleep the ileum.  The ileum is a valve
between the large and small intestines.  My ileum is a lazy piece of crap
and slept for seven days!  So, December 22, 2000, it woke up, I pooped, and
I was out of there December 23.

RECOVERY

Home by Christmas Eve.  I cannot tell you how important that Christmas Eve
was to me.

I slept well each night and took two naps daily.  By the third day, I was
pacing the house, even going to the basement looking for something to do
that didn't require an 8-pound (3.6-kilo) lift.  Within a week, I was down
to one nap a day.

On January 2, 2001 I lost the catheter.  CELEBRATION!!!  I was in diapers,
but that was a lot better than that tube and bag!  I slept dry at night and
generally went through one diaper a day.  After 5 weeks and 6 days, on
February 25th, I graduated to pads.

Not coincidentally, the next day, I went back to work.  Two weeks later, I
was working without restrictions.

Several months later, I realized I was throwing away dry pads, so I stopped
using them.

SEX

After a few months, my doc gave me Viagra.  It didn't work.  We then tried
caverject.  Hypodermic needling my penis was not what I would call fun, but
it did give me a useable erection.  Unfortunately, I now had a short penis.
Pump!  The pump worked really well, but the rings didn't and after a few
times trying, my wife lost interest.  Suddenly, May 12, 2002, I had an
erection all on my own.  That was a nice night.

RELAPSE

It is not really a relapse, but a failure.  The surgery didn't get
everything and by May 2002, my PSA was rising.  At first, "undetectable"
became 0.1.  Then 0.27.  When it hit 0.37, my doc says I gotta get
radiation.  I can still remember where I was.  His office, Room 6, sitting
there, staring at the bed with the stirrups at the end.

So, it's off to the oncologist.  The onc sets me up with 35 rounds of
external beam radiation treatment.  He x-rays me to find out where my
prostate bed is and surrounding organs are.  He marks my skin with ink
markings for something to aim at.  On Monday the next week, I am told to
drop my pants and get on a table.  For 20 minutes this machine is moves
around me and is pointed at the ink marks.  I get up, get dressed, and go
back to work.  This goes on five days a week for seven weeks.  On July 3,
2002, my radiation is complete and I hope I am cured.

During radiation I continued my walking.  I was now up to 3-5 miles, 3-5
days of the week.  I also drank gallons of water daily and went to bed one
hour earlier every night.  Because of this regimen, I believe, my side
effects were minor and none lasted more than a week after the radiation
stopped.

NOT AGAIN!

My PSA was going down, just like it's supposed to (0.34, 0.22, 0.15).  Then
it started back up (0.21, 0.32), so I went on Lupron during July 2003.  I
suffered hot flashes in the beginning, but no longer.  I can have sex, I
just don't care to.

LIFE CONTINUES

So, last week I had my blood drawn.  I waited until I got around to it.  I
had the results sent to my doctor.  I just wasn't all that excited about it.
My doc showed them to me.  My PSA is going up again.  But, it gets easier
after five years.  This time, I won't remember where I was at the time I
found out.  It will meld into all the other days of my life.

Why?  Because, I now know that life didn't end in 2000, nor 2002, nor 2003
or now.  Since my cancer Dx, my uncle and father-in-law have died.  Several
in my family were dx'ed with cancers; my son with testicular, his wife with
cervical dysphasia (which will likely be cancer some day) my brother-in-law
with lymphoma, my cousin with colon, my sister's father-in-law with lung
(funeral was today), and my sister-in-law's sister with breast (won't make
to Christmas).  My sister-in-law is in a nursing home with radiation damage
to her brain.  My mother-in-law has been in and out of the hospital with
lympho-something that causes her legs to swell grotesquely.  My mother has
had four operations on her broken femur then hip.  My daughter probably has
MS "or something worse."

But, on the positive side, in those same five years, I transferred to me
dream job and have high hopes of retiring from there.  My wife retired and
we live in a 2300 square foot condominium that is nested in the woods.  My
son and both daughters married, bought houses and produced for me three
grandchildren.  Both the Reds and Bengals are winning half their games.

Life is still good and I expect ten more years of it, minimum.

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 .08
non Illegitimi carborundum

Dick Smith - 25 Oct 2005 16:14 GMT
Steve,
You message will save the life of others. Why do I say that? Because my
father had PCa just like yours did. After reading your messages, I
realized to try and beat this damn thing I have to get my PSA tested
early and every year, and I'm going to make damn sure I'll do
everything I can so this freakin beast doesn't get me, like it did my
father. So I started last year at the age of 37 and will continue every
year.
Steve Kramer - 25 Oct 2005 23:05 GMT
Thanks Dick.  It means more than you know.

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, 5/05, 10/05
PSA  .07 .05 .06 .05 .08
non Illegitimi carborundum

> Steve,
> You message will save the life of others. Why do I say that? Because my
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> father. So I started last year at the age of 37 and will continue every
> year.
Dick Smith - 26 Oct 2005 23:43 GMT
Steve,
Some how my message to you was deleted...

:-(

(I should get my own newsreader instead of relying on Google.)

Anyway, I've scheduled my next PSA test next month on my 38th birthday.
I remember you telling me that I'm, way ahead of the game...Funny as my
GP suggested I don't need to be tested until 50, eventhough it runs in
the family!

Let's hope the .08 was just a fluke

BTW,
Steve, how old was your father when he was Dx with Pca?
USC Gamecock - 27 Oct 2005 01:12 GMT
Dick -- I notice that we're the same age.  I was diagnosed June 22,
2005 at the age of 37 (turned 38 a little over a month later).  Had RRP
at Johns Hopkins on Aug 12.  My Dad was 55 when diagnosed, his brothers
66 and 75 when diagnosed.  I'm participating in a study with
Walsh/Partin at Hopkins on the potential genetic causes of PCa.  My
hope and prayer is that we figure this out before my 8 year old son
faces what his Poppa, Daddy, and Great Uncles have faced.

Keep me posted on what you find out.  Did I miss anything?  Have you
been diagnosed, or just concerned.  Feel free to shout at me since
we're both "young"!
Dick Smith - 27 Oct 2005 18:26 GMT
No, I'm not Dx. Just concerned. I know my dad wouldn't want me to end
up in his fate, so getting tested early and being aggressive with it,
makes since.  Last year was my first year to get tested. It was .8
I'm assuming this will result in a higher probability of getting PCa
within the next ten years.

My main interest is to watch the trend. I guess for now, this is all we
have to go with as there is no test available yet to detect which type
of cancers are more aggressive.

My next decision will be is, what to do when it gets to 2.5. I imagine
I'll get a fPSA and a biopsy done.
Steve Jordan - 27 Oct 2005 18:47 GMT
> No, I'm not Dx. Just concerned. I know my dad wouldn't want me to end
> up in his fate, so getting tested early and being aggressive with it,
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> My next decision will be is, what to do when it gets to 2.5. I imagine
> I'll get a fPSA and a biopsy done.

Dick is being prudent. Would that other men would do likewise.

I recommend looking into certain other tests:

uPM3 urine test, which I'm told is 81% accurate in detection of PCa,
compared to 43% for the PSA test.

Normal PSA calculation. GV (gland volume in cc) x 0.066=amount of PSA
related to benign prostate cells. See Strum & Pogliano, _A Primer on
Prostate Cancer_ Second Edition (2005) page F-4. Information can also be
found on the website of the Prostate Cancer Research Institute at
http://prostate-cancer.org/index.html Any PSA in excess of the calculated
norm should be considered to be PCa-related until proven otherwise.

Regards,

Steve J

"What are the facts? Again and again and again -- what are the facts? Shun
wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget 'what the stars
foretell,' avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the
unguessable 'verdict of history' -- what are the facts, and to how many
decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your
single clue. Get the facts!"
--Lazarus Long
Dick Smith - 27 Oct 2005 19:58 GMT
>>Normal PSA calculation. GV (gland volume in cc) x 0.066=amount of PSA related to benign prostate cells.

Steve, interesting. Never seen this before. The problem is, I don't
know the size. I guess I would have to have an ultrasound to find out.
Steve Jordan - 27 Oct 2005 20:11 GMT
Quoting me:

>>>Normal PSA calculation. GV (gland volume in cc) x 0.066=amount of PSA related to benign prostate cells.

> Steve, interesting. Never seen this before. The problem is, I don't
> know the size. I guess I would have to have an ultrasound to find out.

Well, I'm not so sure that it would be necessary at this point with the
relatively low PSA to go to the trouble.  Nor am I so sure that it would
indeed be "over-egging the pudding."

The GV calculation is from the Strum & Pogliano book and is also covered on
the PCRI website. I think that use of those two sources would prove to be
enlightening and would give Dick the kind of knowledge base the rest of us
wish we had had when the war began.

Regards,

Steve J
Dick Smith - 27 Oct 2005 20:16 GMT
I assume the units are in mL? ...So based on my calculations, if I'm
Pca free, my prostate is roughly 12mL.

>>Well, I'm not so sure that it would be necessary at this point with the
relatively low PSA to go to the trouble.  Nor am I so sure that it
would
indeed be "over-egging the pudding."

Agree.
Steve Jordan - 27 Oct 2005 21:14 GMT
On October 27, Dick Smith wrote replied to me:

> I assume the units are in mL? ...So based on my calculations, if I'm
> Pca free, my prostate is roughly 12mL.

No, sir. The unit of measurement is cubic centimeters. The only way to
obtain an accurate volume figure is to do an ultrasound exam, as Dick has
mentioned.

I do see what Dick is doing with the manipulation of the formula
GVx0.066=normal PSA. I'm certainly no mathematician, but I doubt that his
calculation (PSA /0.066=GV?) results in a useful figure. Can't say why,
just instinct telling me that the result is unreliable. Maybe 'cuz there's
only one PSA figure, not an average over time.

Regards,

Steve J
Peter Headland - 27 Oct 2005 21:37 GMT
>> I assume the units are in mL

> No, sir. The unit of measurement is cubic centimeters.

Proof, if proof were needed that Americans really do not know anything
about the metric system (in which 1mL = 1cc).

Signature

Peter Headland

Steve Jordan - 27 Oct 2005 22:17 GMT
>>>I assume the units are in mL
>
>>No, sir. The unit of measurement is cubic centimeters.
>
> Proof, if proof were needed that Americans really do not know anything
> about the metric system (in which 1mL = 1cc).

Correct. *But* the units used in the literature I've seen are ccs.

Regards,

Steve J
Steve Kramer - 27 Oct 2005 21:26 GMT
Dick,

You're likely to be .08 for a long while.  But, if next year your are .16
and the year after your are .24 you need not wait until you get to 2.5 to
get a biopsy.

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, 5/05, 10/05
PSA  .07 .05 .06 .05 .08
non Illegitimi carborundum

> No, I'm not Dx. Just concerned. I know my dad wouldn't want me to end
> up in his fate, so getting tested early and being aggressive with it,
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> My next decision will be is, what to do when it gets to 2.5. I imagine
> I'll get a fPSA and a biopsy done.
Dick Smith - 28 Oct 2005 03:05 GMT
Hi Steve,
Last year I was .8, not .08

Wish it was .08, but from my understanding anything around .5-.8 is Ok
(I assume).
Steve Kramer - 29 Oct 2005 02:31 GMT
Sorry.  But 0.8 is still good and you are still looking at progression, not
a one-time score.

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, 5/05, 10/05
PSA  .07 .05 .06 .05 .08
non Illegitimi carborundum

> Hi Steve,
> Last year I was .8, not .08
>
> Wish it was .08, but from my understanding anything around .5-.8 is Ok
> (I assume).
Steve Kramer - 27 Oct 2005 02:31 GMT
> BTW,
> Steve, how old was your father when he was Dx with Pca?

He had pain during sex at the age of 40, but the doc thought he was too
young to consider PCa.  That was 1972.  By 1974 he was diagnosed (Age 42)
with a "spot on his pelvis."  They only had surgery adn colbalt radiation
back then.  Oh, and estrogen.  He died during 1982 (Age 50).
judamd@aol.com - 25 Oct 2005 16:20 GMT
Thanks for reposting your diatribe.  I had not seen it during the last
couple of years I've been here.  Looks like you've been through the
grinder yet you still have a positive outlook.  Good for you.

I was especially moved by what's happened to all your relatives - most
a lot worse off than almost all of us in this newsgroup.  I can't help
but think of a lovely young lady friend of mine - now about 40 - who
was diagnosed with brain cancer in 1998.  Since then she's been in and
out of radiation treatments whenever a new tumor shows up.  Also, every
time she gets radiated, a small part of her healthy brain gets zapped
too which causes her to lose some function.  Is this what happened to
your sister-in-law?  Whenever I think of my friend I also think how
lucky I am.

Anyway, looks like you are hanging in there and putting up the tough
fight.  And thanks also for all your posts here making this newsgroup
valuable to so many of us.
Dave Perry
Steve Kramer - 25 Oct 2005 23:09 GMT
> I can't help
> but think of a lovely young lady friend of mine - now about 40 - who
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> too which causes her to lose some function.  Is this what happened to
> your sister-in-law?

Yes.  Many years ago she was a thriving textile designer designing for
London Fog, that little Polo thingy on Ralph Lauren, etc.  She lived in a
nice apartment with a view of the UN.  Then she was dx'd with a benign, but
growing, tumor at the base of her skull.  It was cut out and radiated.  And
she was fine.

Years later, she started losing short term memory.  She'd go to meetings and
forget what she was asked to design.  Eventually, she'd take a tape recorder
with her and after that just lost customers.

Heavily in debt and after an auto accident where she clearly didn't
recognize what was going on, she came home.  Several years later, she is in
a nursing home, hopelessly in debt and doesn't realize her radiation damage
is continued and fatal.
David S. - 25 Oct 2005 17:30 GMT
Steve:
  I wish I had some words that would help, or that there was something I
could do that would help, but I don't.  I will just echo what some of the
others have said about the ultra sensitive tests and that maybe the increase
in the PSA is really not a trend but just a result of something in machine
calibration or a variation in a batch of chemicals used in the testing.
  As I have said to some of the others here with more than their share of
life's burdens, you have shown a great deal of inner strength in the manner
in which you have faced the challenges presented and maintained a healthy
positive attitude.  God bless you and good luck.
   Thank you.
David S.
Steve U - 25 Oct 2005 22:43 GMT
Steve Kramer,
I'm not usually moved by diatribes. Yours is an exception. Thanks for
posting it, and good luck.
Steve U
I. P. Freely - 26 Oct 2005 03:31 GMT
> I'm not usually moved by diatribes. Yours is an exception.

Ditto, in both content and presentation. Statistics say I'll be following
your footsteps as the years reel by, so I could easily insert myself into
your story. Maybe that's why it rang true.

Leaves me glad about many of the decisions I've made the last 40 years,
especially lately. Thanks.

I.P.
JerryW - 26 Oct 2005 00:24 GMT
Steve,

Thanks for reposting your "diatribe." And, thanks for all the support you've
provided me and many, many others in this newsgroup. I can only hope you
will persevere in your long fight with the "Illegitimus," and that you will
prevail.
Signature

JerryW
jweindel at flash dot net

2/11/04 PSA 2.6, Suspicious DRE (age 62)
2/23/04 Biopsy: Gleason 3+4=7, T2a, left lobe
5/18/04 RRP, Path: Gleason 4+3=7, T2c, both lobes
7/13/04 PSA <0.1
10/12/04 PSA <0.1
1/18/05 PSA <0.1
4/26/05 PSA <0.1
10/13/05 PSA <0.1

> It's time for my annual diatribe on catching prostate cancer.  As usual,
> y'all that have been through this with me can click on the next message.

etc.....

Rate this thread:






 
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.