This subject has brought up another point in my mind. After a positive needle biopsy, how many should have the extensive 3-D mapping that it appears you had prior to the TFT? I had only one positive core out of 12, and a small amount there as well. I seriously considered seed therapy or external beam radiation. After settling on surgery instead, my surgeon and I were very surprised to find the majority of my cancer on the other side and with positive margins there. I hate to think what I would be going through now with my PSA had I chosen another therapy. Following the poor pathology report, I was able to use the salvage radiation as a backup, now knowing the extent of my cancer. Had I had the extensive mapping, would my surgeon have handled things differently, taking more tissue around the prostate on that other side? Should more of us have the extensive mapping before making a decision on treatment? That would be a tremendous cost, but..........
A second question - after your TFT therapy, is surgery still in the picture if there is a reoccurance?
Bottom line - the more varied treatments that are used and studied, the better it will be for those who join us later with this disease, and even for us.
Age 57 at diagnosis (2006), PSA 4.7 (up from 3.2 one year previous)
Biopsy November 8, 2006 1 of 10 cores positive 5% LEFT Side Gleason 3+3
Robotic surgery January 19, 2007
Post Surgery Pathology Stage T3a, Gleason 3+4, positive margins and capsular penetration RIGHT Side
Post Surgery PSA: March 5, 2007: 0.01 5 month PSA 0.08
Adjuvant therapy began June 26, 2007 with Zoladex injection
Radiation began August 23, 2007, ended October 8
First post radiation PSA, December 18, 2007: 0; March 2008 - still 0; July 2008 - 0