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 / April 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Complete path report, uro visit

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
juniper - 30 Mar 2006 22:30 GMT
Met with the uro today for post-surgical.  He recommended radiation
therapy in 3-4 months, when we asked about ADT he said that was
controversial.  I asked about why rad when we had pos lymph node and he
looked at the path, then said it was "tiny" and they probably got it
all.  (AFAIK, *any* positive lymph node means its not local.  Right or
wrong?) Also he said, "if you want to be very aggressive, we can give
you a shot of (depo) today to put it in stasis until the RT."  I wasn't
ready to do a shot because I knew we didn't have any baseline tests and
didn't know what we needed. (And as if I had seen depo in any of this
stuff I've been reading.)  When Steve was asking about RT (IMRT vs 3D,
I think), he said, "That's out of my area of expertise, you need to
talk to a Rad Onc about that."  He didn't say that when asked about
ADT.  (I am trying very hard but not very successfully not to interject
any editorial comments before y'all have a chance to speak.)  Steve
says the doc said it was Stage T3c, I vaguely remember that but at the
moment can't believe it.  That's not how I see it.  We recorded it.  He
was very positive when we asked, picked up the recorder and started the
"This is Dr. Bruce Klestcher and I am meeting with...." till he saw me
laughing, then we just put it on the table.  But, that reaction was a
big plus.  He may be a surgeon first and last, but he is not skittish.
He has always been respectful of our wishes, questions, whatever.
Anyway, here is the complete unedited path report. My earlier post
about "instant continence and mostly bad news" was a summary from
memory after reading.  Maybe I got it wrong?

SURGICAL PATHOLOGY REPORT
* * * TISSUE SOURCE * * *
A. Left pelvic lymph node.
B. Right pelvic lymph node.
C. Prostate.
* * * CLINICAL DIAGNOSIS * * *
Prostate cancer.
* * * GROSS DESCRIPTION * * *
Specimen A is received labeled "left" and consists of one fragment
of fatty tissue, measuring 4.6 cm in greatest dimension. Sectioning
reveals a 4.3 cm lymph node. It is sectioned and submitted entirely in
Al-A2.
Specimen B is received labeled "right" and consists of one fragment
of fatty tissue measuring 5.0 cm in greatest dimension. Dissection
reveals a 4.5 cm lymph node. It is sectioned and submitted entirely in
Bl-B3.
Specimen C consists of a prostate gland with attached seminal vesicies
and vas deferens. The specimen weighs 37 grams and is 4.0 cm superior
to inferior, 4.4 cm transversely and 2.9 cm anterior to posterior. The
right seminal vesicle is 1.5 cm long and 0.9 cm in diameter. The right
vas is 1.8 cm long and 0.5 cm in diameter. The left vas is 1.3 cm long
and 0.5 cm in diameter and the left seminal vesicle is 2.0 cm long and
1.0 cm in diameter. The right side is inked blue, the left side is
inked black, the anterior yellow and the posterior green. No distinct
masses are identified on cross section. Representative sections are
submitted per the prostate protocol, Cl-C22 as follows: Cl-C2) left and
right seminal vesicle and vas; C3-C4) left and right bladder neck
margin, radially sectioned and submitted entirely; C5-C6) left and
right distal urethral margin, radially sectioned and submitted
entirely; C7-Cl0) base section, quartered and submitted clockwise
beginning at left anterior; Cl1-C14) superior section, quartered and
submitted clockwise beginning at left anterior; Cl5-Cl8) mid section
quartered and submitted clockwise; C19-C20) left and right inferior
sections; C21-C22) left and right apex.
* * * MICROSCOPIC DESCRIPTION * * *
Sections of the specimen designated "right pelvic lymph node"
reveal a single lymph node which displays a microscopic subcapsular
focus of metastatic adenocarcinoma. The focus measures less than 1mm in
greatest dimension.
Sections of the specimen designated "left pelvic lymph node" reveal
a single lymph node, negative for tumor.
Sections of the prostate reveal extensive high grade adenocarcinoma.
The tumor involves both lobes, with the largest focus involving the
left prostate (approximately 2.0 cm). The tumor shows features of
Gleason pattern 4 and 5 with a few nests of cells and occasional single
infiltrating tumor cells identified. Tumor focally extends beyond the
prostate to involve soft tissue surrounding the left seminal vesicle,
though the muscular wall of the seminal vesicle is not involved. Focal
perineural invasion is present. The left and right bladder neck margins
are positive for tumor. The right seminal vesicle and distal urethral
margins are uninvolved.
* * * FINAL DIAGNOSIS * * *
Left pelvic lymph node (one)
Microscopic focus of metastatjc adenocarcinoma, less than 1 mm in
greatest dimension.
Right pelvic lymph node (one):
Negative for metastatic adenocarcinoma.
Prostate, radical prostatectomy:
Adenocarcinoma, Gleason score 9 (4+5) involving right and left prostate
lobes (largest focus 2.0 cm).
Focal involvement of soft tissue surrounding left seminal vesicle, with
perineural invasion noted.
Left and right bladder neck margins positive for tumor.
Right and left seminal vesicle and distal urethral margins negative for
tumor.
I.P. Freely - 30 Mar 2006 23:00 GMT
> Met with the uro today for post-surgical.  He recommended radiation
> therapy in 3-4 months, when we asked about ADT he said that was
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> didn't know what we needed. And as if I had seen depo in any of this
> stuff I've been reading.)

NOW you're talking about research time well spent (see my earlier post
about a "research index".)

I.P.
juniper - 30 Mar 2006 23:24 GMT
> NOW you're talking about research time well spent (see my earlier post
> about a "research index".)
Searching this group for the phrase "research index" didn't get me to
your post, I.P.  I was really looking forward it as a 'stroke' because
most of the time, it seems like I'm swimming in so much info that I
don't get a thing from it. Can you supply a link?
I.P. Freely - 01 Apr 2006 02:47 GMT
>> NOW you're talking about research time well spent (see my earlier post
>> about a "research index".)
> Searching this group for the phrase "research index" didn't get me to
> your post, I.P.  I was really looking forward it as a 'stroke' because
> most of the time, it seems like I'm swimming in so much info that I
> don't get a thing from it. Can you supply a link?

It was neither profound nor "approved" terminology; it came from this
post a couple of days ago:

"I'm not saying to stop your research. I AM suggesting that many of us
are tilting at very ill-defined windmills, spending in some cases,
including mine, more time worrying about decimal points than any
adjuvant tx is likely to return to us. That's not just my conclusion; it
also came straight from My S-K trained surgeon/onc/researcher/professor
and his peers many months ago. We need to realize that and start
evaluating what might be called the research index ... the ratio of time
gained BY to time spent IN research."

I've found Googling groups for specific phrases, or even authors, highly
unreliable.

I.P.
c palmer - 31 Mar 2006 00:23 GMT
after reading your post,  i will weigh in.

i've seen it go both ways.

there is one individual who had a similar path report and did not opt
for radiation after surgery.   he's past 2 years post op and still
undetectable.

i've know of another individual who had RT right away after the RP.
he's also about 2 years post op and his psa is still undetectable.

as far as a guarantee or even a best guess, what i've learned is that
it's still a roll of the dice.

there's always close monitoring of psa levels and if it takes any rise,
then, your decision is made for you in respect to RT.  it might offer
the best of both worlds.

whatever you decide to you, the treatment would have to be an aggressive
type due to the gleason of 9.

don't know if all of this made a whole lot of sense.  just trying to
come at the situation, from a different point of view.

~ 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
juniper - 01 Apr 2006 22:54 GMT
> there's always close monitoring of psa levels and if it takes any rise,
> then, your decision is made for you in respect to RT.  it might offer

This makes sense to me.  Do IADT first and if there is still PSA after
that, then radiate.

> whatever you decide to you, the treatment would have to be an aggressive
> type due to the gleason of 9.
Yeah.
juniper - 31 Mar 2006 04:26 GMT
Steve Kramer wrote:
> How is Steve handling all this?
>
> --

SteveK,
I am moving this to the thread about the uro, because that's where my
reply went.  I hope its not too rude. (if it is please tell me so i
don't do it again.)

Steve,
Steve is doing okay with it.  I think he was more prepared than I for
the possibility of ADT.  Although he was more hopeful than I that the
RP would be a cure.  That sounds like a contradiction, but its just
people.  He's been kind of quiet about it all, I've been trying to give
space, then I had a little meltdown a couple of days ago, accused him
of avoiding me or not sharing or whatever women accuse men of in that
situation.  He said he was taking time to think about it and he didn't
know how he felt about it until he thought it through, and as soon as
he knew he'd share it with me.  Pretty normal stuff, I think.

He has made more of a point to initiate kissy-stuff because I
complained that while I didn't feel he disliked me being snuggly, he
never just did it himself.
His penis is harder now, not like an erection, but not relaxed.  It has
been bothering him because he assumed that would go away with the cath.
The uro explained today that the RP changes the blood flow down there,
that two main veins are on top of the prostate and get cut, so that
blood doesn't flow out as well as it used to, that new veins will form.
So that explained that, hopefully relieving some concern.
He's avoiding anything that might be sexual and I'm trying to talk him
into just playing around and plan on *not* having an erection.  I think
he's thinking about it.

Anyway, that is not about ADT.  As far as ADT, he is preparing for the
possibility of having all the worse side effects ("balloon up to 300
pounds" was one phrase).  Also maybe,  that perhaps Dr O will not
recommend it.  And, after the uro visit, he came away with the clear
idea that they got it all and that all he should do is RT.  I said
(->someone correct me if I am wrong, I would love to be wrong) that
once it is in the lymph system, it doesn't matter if they only find a
small focus, it has spread period and is by definition systemic.

Also the Dr said stage T3c, but from various places including Strum, I
get T4aN1Mx.  Since this would be the pathologic staging, I guess it
would be pT4aN1Mx.  This would be the same as the Whitmore-Jewett stage
D1, which is metastatic disease.  Is that right?  Anyway, I think he's
hoping its T3A like the doctor said, but like I said, I hope I'm wrong.

So.  Just dealing with it, you know?  He's reading a lot of newsgroup
stuff, things you guys have written, what Ralph has been saying.

Thanks for asking. We went for an hour and a half walk today.  We sure
live in a beautiful area.

laurel

> Met with the uro today for post-surgical.  He recommended radiation
> therapy in 3-4 months, when we asked about ADT he said that was
[quoted text clipped - 86 lines]
> Right and left seminal vesicle and distal urethral margins negative for
> tumor.
Steve Kramer - 01 Apr 2006 13:27 GMT
> Also the Dr said stage T3c, but from various places including Strum, I
> get T4aN1Mx.  Since this would be the pathologic staging, I guess it
> would be pT4aN1Mx.  This would be the same as the Whitmore-Jewett stage
> D1, which is metastatic disease.  Is that right?  Anyway, I think he's
> hoping its T3A like the doctor said, but like I said, I hope I'm wrong.

I think he is technically suffering from "advanced cancer", but not
"metastatic" cancer.  He could have mets, but there has been no indication
of that yet.

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

Steve Kramer - 31 Mar 2006 12:55 GMT
I'm obviously not a doctor, but it sounds to me like the cancer is highly
agressive and just barely escaped the prostate in at least three directions:
lymph node and right and left bladder neck.

Treatment options are confusing at this point and it sounds like it is
confusing for your doc.  I don't know that I would recommend ADT either,
except as a stabalizing agent until you decide what to do.

Sounds like you need a second opinion to find out what that might be.  Maybe
a third.

In any case, I think you have time to get opinions and make sound decisions.

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

> Met with the uro today for post-surgical.  He recommended radiation
> therapy in 3-4 months, when we asked about ADT he said that was
[quoted text clipped - 86 lines]
> Right and left seminal vesicle and distal urethral margins negative for
> tumor.
Bill - 31 Mar 2006 17:33 GMT
W/ G.S. 9 and extracapsular extensions the one thing that is certain is
that you need adjuvant Tx. The rub, of course, is what, where, and
when. Conventional wisdom is that if you have a high risk of systemic
disease, local Tx like RT is not likely to be curative and that
systemic Tx like ADT and/or chemo is indicated. However, despite most
discussions assuming so, I do not think it is entirely either - or.
Given your extracapsular extensions, especially the bladder neck, I
think it is highly probable that you will have a local recurrence. RT
should get that. On the other hand, w/ the lymph node you also have an
increased risk of distant disease. I too wonder about your staging. I
was thinking that that was one heck of a detailed pathology report
until I realized that no stage was stated. What's w/ that? The
pathologist left it up to your uro to stage it? I would want a
clarification on that. If the pathologist believes that the PCa in the
one lymph node is so small that you merit a T3, you may well be able to
discount that. That apparently is what your doctors are doing. If that
is the case, coupled w/ the fact that you are also at risk for local
recurrence, RT makes good sense. But, I would hedge my bet by
instituting all the nutrition and lifestyle changes that assist your
immune system in fighting any distant PCa that may be present.

Bill Denton
RP 2/12/02
PSA .67
Memphis
juniper - 01 Apr 2006 00:02 GMT
> was thinking that that was one heck of a detailed pathology report
> until I realized that no stage was stated. What's w/ that? The
> pathologist left it up to your uro to stage it? I would want a

Is it normal not to put a staging on it?  Also, no ploidy or anything?
Can someone compare (not necessarily online) your path reports with
this one and see if this one is normal?
ron - 31 Mar 2006 17:45 GMT
There is an increased incidence of bladder cancer in men with PCa and
vice-versa.  So Since the bladder neck is already involved, I wonder if
it would be worth asking your doc if a bladder cancer exam might be
appropriate?..Ron
 
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.