Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / April 2006
Complete path report, uro visit
|
|
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
|
|
|