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 / January 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Cryotherapy

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
ccarson@xtra.co.nz - 17 Jan 2008 09:13 GMT
Hi
I'm a 59 year old from New Zealand and was diagnosed approx 3 years
ago with PSA of 10.5 and a Gleeson of 3+4=7.  Since that time, I've
had EBRT in January/February 2005 over a period of 7 weeks.  PSA
levels came down to 1.4 after the Radiation.

However, they gradually increased from there onwards with the last two
most recent readings of 7.4 & 6.9 (a slight drop).  I've had a further
Biopsy which confirmed the Radiation Treatment had failed with a
Gleason of 4+5=9.

My Urologist has recommended Cryosurgery and has written a referral
for me.  On the 4th of February, the Urologist who I'm being referred
to, is phoning to discuss the situation with me which I hope will
enable me to make a decision on whether or not this is the best
option.

I'm also to have an MRI scan on the 25th.  In the meantime, I've just
started Flomax injections.  I guess one of my main concerns is the
question of incontinence.

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to speak to anyone who has had the
Cryosurgery and would greatly appreciate opinion/advice from anyone
who is able to offer it.

Many thanks
Cliff
ccarson@xtra.co.nz - 17 Jan 2008 09:24 GMT
On Jan 17, 10:13 pm, ccar...@xtra.co.nz wrote:
> Hi
> I'm a 59 year old from New Zealand and was diagnosed approx 3 years
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> Many thanks
> Cliff

Sorry, I've made a mistake, the injections I've just started are
Zoladex.
Thanks
Cliff
Steve Jordan - 17 Jan 2008 18:58 GMT
Cliff amended his post:

> Sorry, I've made a mistake, the injections I've just started are
> Zoladex.

My thanks, too. I missed that. Of course, Flomax is an oral med to
improve urine flow.

The PSA should decrease as the Zoladex affects testosterone (T)
production. Unless the PCa cells are hormone-refractory. Of course the
uro ordered a blood test of baseline T level, didn't he? And intends to
check it again in a month or two, doesn't he? Otherwise how would one
measure the effect of the Zoladex?

Regards,

Steve J
Leonard Evens - 17 Jan 2008 17:55 GMT
> Hi
> I'm a 59 year old from New Zealand and was diagnosed approx 3 years
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> started Flomax injections.  I guess one of my main concerns is the
> question of incontinence.

I'm not a physician, and of course you have to rely on what your doctors
tell you rather than what you read on the web.  But let me tell you what
I've gleaned from my reading, and that might help you ask questions of
your doctors to improve your understanding.

First, I believe that cryosurgery is not usually recommended as a
primary treatment, but is sometimes recommended as a secondary
treatment.  See what Peter Scardino says about the subject in his
"Prostate Book".  In this connection,  you have to ask your doctors to
help you decide whether the risks of side effects such as incontinence
are worth it when balanced against the possibility of limiting the
growth of the cancer or maybe even curing it.   The other thing to ask
about is what the likelihood is that the cancer has migrated to distant
sites, in which case, no local treatment will cure it, although it might
slow it down.

Note that Scardino is pretty negative about cryotherapy, as is Patrick
Walsh, in his book, but that doesn't mean you should let their opinions
influence you more than doctors who are actually familiar with your
specific case.  Also there may have been changes in the treatment method
that the books I mentioned didn't know about.

I hope this information helps you rather than just confusing you more.

> Unfortunately, I haven't been able to speak to anyone who has had the
> Cryosurgery and would greatly appreciate opinion/advice from anyone
> who is able to offer it.

Personally, I don't think anecdotal information of this kind is likely
to be useful.  It may give you some idea of what the experience is like,
but the fact that someone did or did not benefit is not very relevant to
your chances of benefiting since there is often a wide range of outcomes
to therapies like this.  You need to try to find medical experts who are
familiar with your case and the scientific literature about procedure.

> Many thanks
> Cliff

Good luck!
Steve Jordan - 17 Jan 2008 18:52 GMT
On January 17, Cliff wrote:

> I'm a 59 year old from New Zealand and was diagnosed approx 3 years
> ago with PSA of 10.5 and a Gleeson of 3+4=7.  Since that time, I've
> had EBRT in January/February 2005 over a period of 7 weeks.  PSA
> levels came down to 1.4 after the Radiation.

Not enough, I think.

> However, they gradually increased from there onwards with the last two
> most recent readings of 7.4 & 6.9 (a slight drop).  I've had a further
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> enable me to make a decision on whether or not this is the best
> option.

(snip)

Anecdotes from folks should be viewed with extreme caution. They might
be interesting, but ought not be the basis for a treatment (tx) decision.

Having said that, I'll say this: I was diagnosed with an Gleason 4,5=9
tumor on one side, then a year later a small 4,4=8 tumor was discovered
on the other.

In the interim, I had undergone Cryotherapy. My case is one which could
be used as an object lesson in the need to seek experienced medical aid.
I didn't and paid the price: the bumbler failed to do a complete freeze.

The most successful aspect of the procedure was destruction of the
erectile nerves and consequent total, irreparable, impotence. This was
an expected side effect SE) of the procedure.

I had a suprapubic catheter for almost a month. When removed, I leaked
from the wound, but only when urinating. This lasted while the wound
healed, about another six weeks.

That was about all by way of SEs.

Now to the mystery: Cryosurgery, like radiation, is a local tx. With a
Gleason 9 case, there is an excellent chance that the prostate cancer
(PCa) is at least systemic. If such be the case, no local treatment will
be helpful.

Bear in mind that uros are first and foremost surgeons. The referring
uro appears to me to have run out of ideas. And what, exactly, is to be
frozen if the gland was destroyed (as it should have been) by the radiation?

I most urgently recommend that Cliff consult a genuine cancer
specialist, an oncologist. Preferably one who is well-trained in the tx
of PCa.

There are many tests that are helpful in constructing a clinical picture
of an individual's situation. Unfortunately, they are all too often
ignored by uros, who might not even be aware of them.

Some of them are:
1. Chromogranin-A (CGA): a marker for small-cell or neuroendocrine PCa,
a particularly virulent type.
2. Carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA):  a fetal antigen or protein that may
be expressed by PCa that is aggressive and often androgen independent.
3. Prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP): an enzyme or biomarker secreted by
prostate cells associated with a higher probability of disease outside
the prostate when levels are 3.0 or higher; PAP elevations suggest that
the disease is not OCD (organ confined disease).
4. Neuron-specific enolase (NSE): Similar to CGA, above.

I recommend the objective, encyclopedic and reliable information
available on the website of the Prostate Cancer Research Institute
(PCRI) at: http://prostate-cancer.org/index.html

For example, searching on cryosurgery will produce 78 entries, none of
them from equipment manufacturers.

Good luck!

Regards,

Steve J
Steve Kramer - 17 Jan 2008 22:29 GMT
> Hi
> I'm a 59 year old from New Zealand and was diagnosed approx 3 years
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> Cryosurgery and would greatly appreciate opinion/advice from anyone
> who is able to offer it.

Welcome to the group, Cliff.  I am sorry to hear of the failure of your
EBRT.  There are several unusual issues with your case.

Few people have been treated with EBRT alone as a primary treatment; at
least as late as 2005.  I think none here.  And a post-treatment biopsy is
also rare.

Less rare is Cryo.  Since I have attended this newsgroup, over 800 people
have passed through.  Of those who identified their primary treatment, only
ten chose Cryo.  Their email addresses, as they were when they visited, are
listed below.  One, Steve Jordan, is still an active participant and will
probably answer you soon (or has already).

Unfortunately, most of those listed will not give you warm feelings about
the cold treatment.  Canada Bob seems to have had better luck with Celebrex.
Frank's PSA went up after treatment and he then ended up having RRP.  Jack
in Phoenix's was just a complete failure (of course some may consider all
failures complete).  Robert Austin's PSA was rising upt to October 2004 when
we last heard from him.  Scrapio is on hormone therapy.  I don't think any
would claim success, but I could be wrong.

     robert01942@hotmail.com
     dubosky@DELETETHIS.earthlink.net
     donbfla@webtv.net
     ewnowak@adelphia.net
     vinge3@cox.net
     jsshp@earthlink.net
     RobertBob@Att.Net
     scrapiro@comcast.net
     mycroft@cox.net
     trishpet@peoplepc.com
Alan Meyer - 18 Jan 2008 01:10 GMT
> ...
> Few people have been treated with EBRT alone as a primary treatment; at
> least as late as 2005.  I think none here.  And a post-treatment biopsy is
> also rare.
> ...

I think you made a mistake on that Steve.  Lots of men were
treated with IMRT as a sole, primary treatment.  That's the most
common form of EBRT now used.  Perhaps you were forgetting
that IMRT is EBRT (though not all EBRT is IMRT)?

   Alan
Steve Kramer - 18 Jan 2008 12:01 GMT
>> ...
>> Few people have been treated with EBRT alone as a primary treatment; at
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> common form of EBRT now used.  Perhaps you were forgetting
> that IMRT is EBRT (though not all EBRT is IMRT)?

You are correct sir.  I have gotten into the bad habit of distinguishing the
two.  If I had had IMRT, I would not state that I had EBRT and should not
expect that of other.  I did have RRP and would not say that I had RP or
surgery.  But, others do so all the time.

My apologies to Cliff.

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            PSAD 0.19 years
EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47
PSA  .34 .22 .15 .21 .32                       PSAD .056 years
Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 and every 4 months there after
PSA  .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 .145       PSAD 1.4 years
Casodex added daily 07/06
PSA <0.04, <0.05, <0.04, <0.04 10/11/07
Non Illegitimi Carborundum

Ron B - 19 Jan 2008 18:07 GMT
Alan, you help so much.

Though one could do research, if it wouldn't be a lot of trouble...I bet
new folks here would like to read about the differences regarding IMRT
and EBRT.

Maybe a new topic heading...it would surely be of great help.

Ron
A. Black - 19 Jan 2008 16:38 GMT
On Jan 17, 4:13 am, ccar...@xtra.co.nz wrote:
> I'm a 59 year old from New Zealand and was diagnosed approx 3 years
>,,,
> Unfortunately, I haven't been able to speak to anyone who has had the
> Cryosurgery and would greatly appreciate opinion/advice from anyone
> who is able to offer it.

Suggest you contact your local support group.  They can likely put you
in contact with people with similar experience locally.  In New
Zealand
check out:
http://www.prostate.org.nz

That link and others are listed here:
http://palpable-prostate.blogspot.com/2007/03/community-resources.html

---
The Palpable Prostate
http://palpable-prostate.blogspot.com
 
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.