Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / March 2006
PSA scores affect cancer recurrence
|
|
Thread rating:  |
c palmer - 24 Mar 2006 09:06 GMT Sun 19 Mar 2006 09:43 AM CST
A consortium of prostate cancer experts have discovered that prostate cancer patients who have a lower prostate specific antigen (PSA) score after radiation therapy are less likely to have their cancer return or spread to other parts of their body than patients with a higher PSA score.
Findings from the clinical investigation appeared in the March 15 issue of the International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics, a publication of ASTRO, the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.
The study was conducted on nearly 5,000 patients treated with radiation therapy in nine well-known academic radiation oncology departments across the United States. The participating institutions included the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor; M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas; Fox Chase Cancer Center in Philadelphia, Pa.; Cleveland Clinic Foundation in Ohio; William Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak, Mich.; Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology in St. Louis, Mo.; Mayo Clinic College of Medicine in Rochester, Minn.; Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston; and Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City.
After receiving radiation, most patients experience a decline in their PSA blood test score. Doctors measure the PSA level after radiation to monitor treatment response. If the PSA decreases and then stays relatively level, the treatment is considered a success. But if the PSA then rises, doctors may consider additional treatments for cancer recurrence.
In this study, researchers set out to examine whether or not a lower PSA score is a good indicator in predicting the likelihood that a patient's prostate cancer will return or spread. In the current standard of care, doctors are less interested in the actual PSA score but in whether the PSA rises after treatment. A rise is used to gauge whether the cancer will likely return.
The doctors found that a lower PSA level was associated with a dramatic decrease in both prostate cancer recurrence and the spread of cancer among patients across all risk categories. The patients were separated into different categories based on their PSA score after radiation.
The patients with the lowest PSA scores experienced an eight-year disease-free survival rate of 75 percent, compared with only 18 percent for those with the highest PSA scores. Patients who had the lower PSA scores also had a 97-percent distant metastasis-free survival rate compared with a 73-percent rate for those with the highest PSA scores.
In addition, the researchers found that patients treated with a higher dose of radiation had a better chance of achieving a lower PSA score and were less likely to see their prostate cancer return.
"While there is no magic number for the PSA that guarantees that prostate cancer has been cured in an individual patient, in general, the lower the PSA number, the better chances that the cancer will not return or spread," said Michael E. Ray, M.D., Ph.D., lead author of the study and a radiation oncologist at the University of Michigan Medical Center. "These findings may help us to identify high-risk patients early. This may allow their doctors to consider other adjuvant or salvage therapies to hopefully increase their chances for survival."
This information was provided by the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO).
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
Bill - 24 Mar 2006 16:50 GMT Here's another one confirming what everyone would logically assume. If the purpose of the RT as a primary Tx is to "kill" the prostate and associated structures, and the success of that Tx is dependent in part on to what degree that is acheived, and post-Tx PSA is a reliable indicator of that, is it not logical that the lower the PSA the more successful the Tx? Or, conversely, that a failure to acheive a "low" PSA probably means a less than optimum "kill" and/or systemic disease? Seems that way to me. Pretty much the same as saying that failure to acheive undetectable PSA post-RP puts you at greater risk of recurrence. However, w/ RP we have a standard - undetectability using the ultrasensitive test - but w/ RT how low does "low" have to be before your doctors will "consider other adjuvant or salvage therapies to hopefully increase their chances for survival?" Until that question is answered I don't see that this adds much.
Bill Denton RP 2/12/02 PSA .67 Memphis
Alan Meyer - 25 Mar 2006 08:26 GMT > Here's another one confirming what everyone would logically assume. If > the purpose of the RT as a primary Tx is to "kill" the prostate and [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > to hopefully increase their chances for survival?" Until that question > is answered I don't see that this adds much. You raise a good question. Still, it seems to me that the study is useful because it assigns risk numbers to PSA values. That won't automatically tell you whether more treatment is required, but I should think it would help in the decision making.
Also, it seems to me that we too often arrive at conclusions based on notions that "it stands to reason that ..."
Sure, it stands to reason that the lower your PSA goes, the more likely you are to be cured. However it's important to have actual empirical confirmation of that.
Just a few years ago doctors routinely told their patients to drink 8 glasses of water a day. The theory was that it would "flush" the system of toxins. It stood to reason that it was true. The only problem was that it turned out to be false. Actual observations showed that people drinking 8 glasses of water a day were not healthier than people who just drank when they were thirsty.
Alan
Bill - 25 Mar 2006 17:05 GMT That was my point, Alan - they did NOT assign risk numbers to PSA values.
""While there is no magic number for the PSA that guarantees that prostate cancer has been cured in an individual patient, in general, the lower the PSA number, the better chances that the cancer will not return or spread," said Michael E. Ray, M.D., Ph.D., lead author of the study and a radiation oncologist at the University of Michigan Medical Center.
All they found out was that there is a correlation between general PSA level and freedom from recurrence.
Bill Denton RP 2/12/02 PSA .67 Memphis
I.P. Freely - 25 Mar 2006 19:28 GMT > Just a few years ago doctors routinely told their patients to > drink 8 glasses of water a day. The theory was that it would [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > of water a day were not healthier than people who just drank > when they were thirsty. I've researched that for many years, and the truth lies in the middle. I'll spare the details unless someone wants them, but the bottom line is that by the time young people perceive thirst, they are already dehydrated sufficiently that tests show they are measurably impaired mentally and physically. The corollary mantra was that people our age perceive thirst even more poorly, until more recent testing denied even that. I do not believe that; many of us at PC age are in bad shape before we perceive thirst.
Long before I perceive thirst, I'm so dried out that my urine goes yellow (it should look almost like tap water), it stinks strongly (it shouldn't be THAT bad), I hardly need to pee even when I get up in the morning, the skin on the back of my hand forms standing wrinkles when I cock my wrist up with my fingers extended (like when you flatten your palms against a wall), and if I pinch a wrinkle up with my other hand, it stays there rather than fading quickly.
THAT'S dehydration, and it impairs vital cellullar activity of all sorts throughout our body. Sedentary people still need about two quarts (8 glasses) of fluids a day -- INCLUDING WHAT'S IN THEIR FOOD -- and hard play or work can drive daily fluid replacement needs into gallons.
I.P.
Steve Kramer - 26 Mar 2006 02:25 GMT > THAT'S dehydration, and it impairs vital cellullar activity of all sorts > throughout our body. Sedentary people still need about two quarts (8 > glasses) of fluids a day -- INCLUDING WHAT'S IN THEIR FOOD -- and hard > play or work can drive daily fluid replacement needs into gallons. WeatherChannel.com has a hydration calculator. Put in your weight and activity and it tells you what you need to drink. For walking, I need 1¼ gallons.
 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, 2/06 PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 Non Illegitimi Carborundum
Beverley - 29 Mar 2006 02:06 GMT Our radiation oncologist uses the 0.2 as the marker for men having had RT in any form. The trick is to hit it early and stay there. Of course it can fall even lower and the lower it falls the better. Hubby's last PSA was 0.01 was at the 3.5 year mark after 5 weeks of EBRT and then brachytherapy. The four year mark is coming up soon and the doctor says what your PSA is at the 4 year mark is the determining factor of where the PSA will be in another 15 years. Bev
> Here's another one confirming what everyone would logically assume. If > the purpose of the RT as a primary Tx is to "kill" the prostate and [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > PSA .67 > Memphis Alan Meyer - 29 Mar 2006 05:40 GMT > ... Hubby's last PSA was 0.01 was > at the 3.5 year mark after 5 weeks of EBRT and then brachytherapy. The four > year mark is coming up soon... Great news Bev. It sounds like PCa is well behind him.
Alan
Beverley - 30 Mar 2006 03:09 GMT We hope it is a thing of the past. He's staked his life on it. Bev
> > ... Hubby's last PSA was 0.01 was > > at the 3.5 year mark after 5 weeks of EBRT and then brachytherapy. The four [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Alan
|
|
|