Seed side effects by Gleeson6

New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> ]

BuiDoi
Regular Member


Date Joined Aug 2010
Total Posts : 234
   Posted 4/7/2011 1:36 AM (GMT -6)   
Gleeson6 said...
It seems as if the seed guys are pretty happy with their results (as are many of the RP guys).
It does seem though that the side effects are much less with seeds than RP. Am I missing something?


It's a shame that when folk ask a legitimate question, and others give an opinion, that some are quick to brand them as inexperienced and hence unworthy of being listened to..

The question raised is one of the most basic questions that a PC Sufferer needs to ask.
I was just so lucky that I had some contacts in medical circles. Of those that I contacted and declared that I had a G6 AC, all responses suggested "If it was me at age 60, I WOULD NOT have radiation."

More interestingly, two of those who responded were top professors in radiation-oncology.
NOW - Why would Radiation Professors suggest that I NOT have radiation as a FIRST choice ?
They told me to keep radiation as a backup !

The total irony is that those who boastfully declare that they had radiation and they are back at it like rabbits, have something to learn, and they should enjoy it whilst they can, because 66% of men who have radiation, develop full ED within two years.. Did they read the book by Professor Chapman
ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/2123/6835/3/Let-sleeping-dogs-lie.pdf

and, according to the the statistics, that's it !
Whereas for those who have an RP, there is the hope that things will improve, but still 66% are decidedly bedroom-challenged at 2 years.

The fact seems to be that with an RP, there is still the capacity for further salvage therapy, if it is needed.
and that, after radiation, the Prostate is "Cooked" and as such the concept of delicate surgery becomes a thing of the past. and, it continues to degrade for the next years, and there good chances that your problems will start from that time.

So, to Gleeson6, can I suggest that your question ... "Am I missing something?" is most appropriate.

If you approach a radiation doctor, they want to sell you on Radiation, and likewise a cutter will want to sell you on being cut.

In your position and from what you have described, you would be likely one (like me) of those with the 95% chance of FULL recovery with an RP (ie long life), but understand that ED is a side effect that 66% of ALL men WILL suffer from.
Most men WILL be ED challenged after the RP, and 33% will recover by the end of year two. 66% will be challenged.

Radiation hopefully kills the cancer. An RP removes the cancer !

Most men after radiation, will have no ED problems at first, but will reportedly develop such within 2 years.

Now ask yourself the question - why do the hospital staff leave the room when administering radiation..?
Simple - ionising radiation causes cancer..

I bumped into a friend a few weeks ago who had radiation treatment 10 years ago.. The oncologist actually said that the new cancer was caused by the treatment radiation.. Such honesty !! ie.. It does happen.

For you as a patient, treatment becomes a gamble according to your age. At 61, radiation is not preferred as subsequent radiation damage, might shorten a life.
At age 70, radiation might be a more acceptable risk
and at age 80, a likely preferred treatment.

Your call is to chose a treatment that gives you the BEST second-choices, should the unlikely , actually happen !

As far as ED is concerned, understand that all will not be lost. The way you express your love might change but will likely not be gone !

Chin up.. I suspect that you have a long life to live !
..
.
Nov 2009 = First-PSA 5.3 @ 60yo - Asymptomatic - DRE-Non-Palpable
Jan-'10 = TRUS Bx DX - AC T1c - GS(3+3)=6 , 5 & 45% max., L-MidZone
May-'10 = RRP-Nrv-Spare
Post Op. GS(3+4)=7, 1.1cm3, Pos Margins, EPE (focal) Lateral Left
MI(xtensive) Post, Grade3 x 8mm
+8week PSA<0.01, ED-85%, Incont-30%
+16W PSA<0.01, ED -85%, Cont -5%
+17W First 'DRY' day. ED -90%
+26W ED -60%

BillyMac
Veteran Member


Date Joined Feb 2008
Total Posts : 1858
   Posted 4/7/2011 4:32 AM (GMT -6)   
Although I selected surgery I can also see another point of view.

"Radiation hopefully kills the cancer. An RP removes the cancer !"
Well no not always.

"Now ask yourself the question - why do the hospital staff leave the room when administering radiation..?
Simple - ionising radiation causes cancer..
"

Well yes it can. But you the patient are getting a measured dose for a fixed period of time. Why do they leave the room? Well that's pretty obvious. Can you imagine the cumulative dose they would receive if they sat with each and every patient.

"I bumped into a friend a few weeks ago who had radiation treatment 10 years ago.. The oncologist actually said that the new cancer was caused by the treatment radiation.. Such honesty !! ie.. It does happen."

Well I'd wager that that was pure speculation made without any backup evidence.

When we select surgery we say if that fails because there was tumour in the prostate bed, there is always the back-up option of radiation. But if that were the only reason to choose surgery and you expect the follow up treatment to be successful, why not choose radiation to the gland and surrounding prostate bed as the first line of treatment. I can readily admit (without regrets or second thoughts) that my surgery was chosen because (1) I wanted it out of me and (2) I was uncomfortable not really knowing the true extent of the tumour. I tend to be a stickler for detail which is probably why I opt for the ultrasensitive test as well. It's like the argument of treatment for low volume, low Gleason tumour. Most are not comfortable with AS ------ but simply because you would not be comfortable is not a reason to tell somebody else not to consider it. Surely we can open our minds to the pros and cons of all treatments ------ there is no need to mindlessly defend our respective turf and dump on all others.

Bill

Post Edited (BillyMac) : 4/7/2011 4:40:11 AM (GMT-6)


Tudpock18
Forum Moderator


Date Joined Sep 2008
Total Posts : 4157
   Posted 4/7/2011 5:14 AM (GMT -6)   
BuiDoi:
 
BillyMac has provided some excellent counter points to your post and I applaude his balanced approach.  Furthermore, might I add a couple of thoughts:
 
1.  It is a total myth that there are only back up options to failed surgery but not failed radiation.  Failed radiation backups include seeding with a different isotope, HDR brachtherapy, crysurgery and some promising results with HIFU.  These are equally effective as salvage procedures as is radiation for failed surgery.  Plus Billy makes an excellent point re why not choose radiation to begin with if "backup plan" is your serious concern.
 
2.  The reference provided by YOU (page 80) shows some quite different results than you quoted in your post.  Gleason6 was asking about seeds specifically.  In the reference YOU provided, it shows the 3 year impotence level for low dose brachytherapy at 36.4%.  This is vs. 67.9% impotence for nerve sparing RP and 86.7% for non-nerve sparing RP.  So, you have quite effectively provided data that demonstrates dramatically better sexual performance at 3 years for brachtherapy patients vs. surgery patients.
 
Tudpock (Jim)
Age 62 (64 now), G 3 + 4 = 7, T1C, PSA 4.2, 2/16 cancerous, 27cc. Brachytherapy 12/9/08. 73 Iodine-125 seeds. Procedure went great, catheter out before I went home, only minor discomfort. Everything continues to function normally as of 12/8/10. PSA: 6 mo 1.4, 1 yr. 1.0, 2 yr. .8. My docs are "delighted"! My journey:
http://www.healingwell.com/community/default.aspx?f=35&m=1305643&g=1305643#m1305643

davidg
Veteran Member


Date Joined Feb 2011
Total Posts : 4093
   Posted 4/7/2011 6:16 AM (GMT -6)   
This is a site that I trust is intended for anyone and everyone and to provide support for anyone and everyone. Other than the owner of the URL, it doesn't belong to anybody. and when a very limited few act irrationally, make hilarious claims about seniority, or simply need the site for generating pissing contests or for trolling around in order to get their kicks it can make the site less effective and keep away new participants.

I know that other than the thoughtful and caring contributions from the majority here, I gain the most from this site when new people come to share their pc experiences.

Forums on any topic always seems to disproportionately bring out the "grumpier" element. This is true of political forums for instance. I think it would be wonderful if more people who have had very positive experiences with pc stuck around. Unfortunately ( or maybe it's a good healthy thing ), most of those seem to move on quickly and put pc behind them. Some of us on the other hand can't seem to live without it being a major part of our life even if we're told by professionals that its behind us. I'm only 3 months out of surgery and still full of questions and doubts so I don't know which camp I fall under.

But in the end, the best policy on any forum is to simply ignore the people one finds obnoxious or kind of "out there". That's what I do. I am not saying banning or shutting people up is a good idea. That's a slippery slope and it looks like the mods here do a great job allowing everyone to express their opinions. I doubt they've ever had to ban anyone as it seems implausible that anyone has ever acted intentionally in a way designed to attempt to disrupt the service this forum provides.

As for radiation and seeds, I will admit that I gave it some thought before opting for Da Vinci. I even spoke with Dr. Stock, my bosses doc for seeds who claimed it was better than surgery, but that his colleague ( my surgeon ) would also provide excellent results if I went with him.

Every specialist I spoke with assured me radiation would also work for me (given my numbers) but other than Stock, they all explained to me why they thought surgery was the best option for someone in my exact situation. This includes oncologists with no connection to surgery. My surgeon is really enthusiastic about the benefits of davinci and it's a bloody good thing he is because I was letting him do it to me.

When considering radiation, I was concerned about many of the things you post, Buidoi.

Everyone told me that ED and incontinence were possibilities there also.

Not only did everyone also tell me that radiation could cause major problems years later, but I have also witnessed these with my sister-in-law who has been battling stage 4 cancer and has fallen victim to a ton of physical issues not because of the cancer, but because of the radiatoin and chemo. They had to sew her eye shut last month because of all the radiation.

I was definitelt not keen on the 30-40 treatments. I much prefer one procedure.

I witnessed my boss go through it and it was a grueling process for him. He had great spirits and laughed everything off, including wetting himself, but I could see how tired it made him and how it affected him.

Although my psa and gleason might not have warranted it, I was very hesitant to go down a route that would also require hormone treatment. That caused havoc with my boss and many other accounts I had read about on Yana.

Although I was hoping on a one shot fix it all with surgery, I was comforted knowing that if surgery didn't work, I cld fall back on radiation HT and any other treatment to keep my fight going. Apparently starting out with radiation wouldn't have given me this option even though my surgeon says he can do that in some cases.

A lastly, but this was perhaps the strongest pull I had towards surgery, was the fact that my prostate was compromised, toxic, and I just wanted the darn thing out of me. During those very dark initial days, my biggest hope was that we had caught it early, and that by removing the organ from my body I could fully expel the cancer from my body and start over. That gave me hope. All my conversations with loved ones didn't revolve around possible ED and incontinence. At that stage I would express my hope that it was organ confined and that I had caught it in time. Loved ones would always remind me to just hang in there and that in a few weeks after surgery I'd know for sure and that they were all positive it was organ confined etc. etc. That really gave me hope and something to shoot for at that very confusing and scary stage. Then I went through the same thing waiting for my first post op psa score.

The way I see it, getting pc forces us into a process we wish we weren't a part of. However, in my view, and for me because of my scores and my personality, surgery (robotic in my case) was the best way to navigate the process. It a series of challenges, some big like surgery, pathology, psa, and some small like catheter, drain, passing gas, first bm, regaining strength that we all go through sequentially. Yes, I know ED and Incontinence are also part of that process. Luckily for me, and I say this with absolute humility, I did not have to worry about those. But as I said in another thread, my goal was expelling the cancer first and foremost. I would have been willing to take those hits and knew of the potential risks which although real, are greatly blown out of proportion by some when it comes to statistics.

Julietinthewoods
Regular Member


Date Joined Sep 2010
Total Posts : 309
   Posted 4/7/2011 7:55 AM (GMT -6)   
BillyMac, that was an excellent post. It probably expresses the opinion of most readers here, who just wish for the best for each guy and his individual lifestyle and situation....and who will quickly tire of snide insinuations about their intellect after they have made their own treatment choices.

We are lucky we have choices in the first place. We are lucky we don't have to accept one treatment course and we are lucky we don't have to trust completely the opinion of any one doctor. I find the core group of posters here to be amazingly intelligent and well-informed and generous in their sharing and well-wishing. If we don't all know by now that there is NO PERFECT PCa treatment we just haven't been paying attention.

Juliet, posting on behalf of her smart, well-educated husband

Purgatory
Elite Member


Date Joined Oct 2008
Total Posts : 25380
   Posted 4/7/2011 8:22 AM (GMT -6)   
great answer, billy mac, as expected
Age: 58, 56 dx, PSA: 7/07 5.8, 10/08 16.3
3rd Biopsy: 9/08 7 of 7 Positive, 40-90%, Gleason 4+3
open RP: 11/08, on catheters for 101 days
Path Rpt: Gleason 3+4, pT2c, 42g, 20% cancer, 1 pos marg
Incont & ED: None
Post Surgery PSA: 2/09 .05,5/09 .1, 6/09 .11. 8/09 .16
Post SRT PSA: 1/10 .12, 4/8 .04, 8/6 .06 2/11 1.24
Latest: 6 Corr Surgeries to Bladder Neck, SP Catheter since 10/1/9, SRT 39 Sess/72 gy ended 11/09, 21 Catheters, Ileal Conduit Surgery 9/10,

F8
Veteran Member


Date Joined Feb 2010
Total Posts : 3804
   Posted 4/7/2011 10:57 AM (GMT -6)   
>>The total irony is that those who boastfully declare that they had radiation and they are back at it like rabbits, have something to learn, and they should enjoy it whilst they can...<<<
 
Buidoi -- i think when you wish ill on other cancer patients you cross a line that requires moderation or suspension. 
 
ed
age: 56
PSA on 12/09: 6.8
gleason 3+4 = 7
HT, BT and IGRT
received 3rd and last lupron shot 9/14/10
2/8/11 PSA <.1, T= 6 ng/dl

James C.
Veteran Member


Date Joined Aug 2007
Total Posts : 4462
   Posted 4/7/2011 11:06 AM (GMT -6)   
ed, I don't see that he is wishing ill on others, sorry.

Guys all: Discuss, don't argue, or insult, or read between the lines, or this thread will be locked also. There is all the probability in the world that we can have a reasoned, calm discussion without falling into old habits and patterns. Prove it....
James C. Age 63
Gonna Make Myself A Better Man tinyurl.com/28e8qcg
4/07: PSA 7.6, 7/07 Biopsy: 3 of 16 PCa, 5% involved, left lobe, GS6
9/07: Nerve Sparing open RP, Path: pT2c, 110 gms., clear except:
Probable microscopic involvement-left apical margin -GS6
3 Years: PSA's .04 each test until 04/10-.06, 09/10-.09, 12/10-.09, 02/11-.08
ED-total-Bimix 30cc

Tigerfan53
Veteran Member


Date Joined Jan 2011
Total Posts : 929
   Posted 4/7/2011 11:50 AM (GMT -6)   

BuiDoi said …

“I bumped into a friend a few weeks ago who had radiation treatment 10 years ago.. The oncologist actually said that the new cancer was caused by the treatment radiation.. Such honesty !! ie.. It does happen.”

 

I just have a question.  I know radiation has improved over the last several years; now we have IMRT, IGRT, ultrasound guided brachytherapy with post seed implantation CT scans to verify placement.  Basically they are able to give higher doses to a more precisely confined area.  So here’s the question: hasn’t the risk of getting cancer from the radiation treatment dropped using these newer methods?


Age 53
Diagnosed Dec 2010
PSA 5.3
Biopsy: 50% in 1 of 12 cores, Gleason 6
PSA 5.6
RRP scheduled for 6/6/2011

Newporter
Regular Member


Date Joined Sep 2010
Total Posts : 225
   Posted 4/7/2011 12:25 PM (GMT -6)   
Instead of arguing among ourselves, I suggest that we all count our blessing: We, though unfortunately have cancer, are having one that is not as bad as for example lung cancer and have a number of very good treatment options including doing nothing. Let's give encouragement to the new members and let them decide for themselves.

Let's accept that what treatment we choose is personal and we all just present the benefit and good fortune of our outcome instead of trying to preach an approach. Let the new member together with their doctors, choose for themselves.

Actually, I am puzzled by the number of incontinence and ED after surgery for the forum participants. My own very limited sample based on outcomes I personally knew indicated incontinence is infrequent. Don't know about ED though.
65 Dx June-2010 PSA: 10.7, biopsy: Adenocarcinoma, 1 core Gleason 6, 3 cores atypia; Clinical stage T2; CT, Bone Scan, MRI all negative

8-23-10 Robotic RP; Pathology: Organ confined, negative margins, Lymph nodes, Seminal Vesicle clear; PNI present; multiple Adenocarcinoma sites Gleason 3+3 with tertiary Gleason 4+. Stage: pT2,N0,Mx,R0

Catheter out 8-30-10 no incontinence, no ED. 3/2011 PSA: <.1

Tudpock18
Forum Moderator


Date Joined Sep 2008
Total Posts : 4157
   Posted 4/7/2011 1:20 PM (GMT -6)   
davidg:
 
This is in response to your earlier post on this thread.  I assure you that it is in the spirit of discussion requested by James and is no way meant to be argumentative nor is there anythng written between the lines.
 
You said: "...a very limited few act irrationally, make hilarious claims about seniority, or simply need the site for generating pissing contests or for trolling around in order to get their kicks..."
 
I respond:  Surely you must realize that characterizing your fellow posters in this manner is not conducive to enhancing your credibility or personal standing in the forum.  In concert with your refererence to David C. as a "half wit" many people will find your comments offensive.  I have known David C. via this forum for over 2 years and read many of his posts.  I can assure you that he is fully witted and a well respected (even beloved by many) member of our family here.
 
You said:  "I think it would be wonderful if more people who have had very positive experiences with pc stuck around."
 
I respond:  There are many posters here who do just that...including me.  My primary motivations for sticking around are to continue to learn more about our shared disease, to share my learned information with newcomers and to provide some balance to a site that was once almost totally populated by a crowd that shouted "get it out".  BTW, the latter is only rarely the case any longer as both surgery and radiation regulars consistently preach to newcomers about taking their time, getting educated and getting multiple opinions.
 
You said:  "I doubt they've ever had to ban anyone as it seems implausible that anyone has ever acted intentionally in a way designed to attempt to disrupt the service this forum provides. "
 
I respond:  My understanding is that the moderators and/or administrator has unfortunately had to suspend or revoke privileges of some posters in the past.
 
You said:  "Not only did everyone also tell me that radiation could cause major problems years later, but I have also witnessed these with my sister-in-law who has been battling stage 4 cancer and has fallen victim to a ton of physical issues not because of the cancer, but because of the radiatoin and chemo. They had to sew her eye shut last month because of all the radiation."
 
I respond:  What happened to your sister-in-law is tragic.  But, I hope you understand that radiation and chemo for stage 4 cancer is totally different than radiation for brachytherapy.  To imply otherwise is inaccurate.
 
You said:  "I was definitelt not keen on the 30-40 treatments. I much prefer one procedure."
 
I respond:  For brachytherapy there is only one out-patient procedure.  Perhaps you are thinking about a series of IMRT treatments.
 
You said:  "I witnessed my boss go through it and it was a grueling process for him. He had great spirits and laughed everything off, including wetting himself, but I could see how tired it made him and how it affected him."
 
I respond:  You appear to be mixing apples and oranges here.  Your boss was on both HT and had brachytherapy.  The side effects of the two are totally different and to imply that his SE's are related to the brachytherapy are most likely incorrect.  There may be many reasons why he had HT along with the brachy.  In another thread you implied that this is the protocol that his physician uses for all of his brachy patients.  I can assure you with almost 100% certainly that this is not the case.  Your boss may have been on HT to shrink the prostate before brachy or because the physician thought the combo therapy for this particular patient was appropriate.  However, most brachy patients who have normal sized prostate and meet the other requirements for brachy do not have the procedure combined with HT...though some do.  My point is that to lump the SE's together is misleading.
 
I think that just about covers it.  I hope you will accept my comments in a positive spirit.  I encourage you to try to be a little less combative (and even insulting) and a little more open to the cumulative knowledge of many experienced posters on this forum.
 
Tudpock (Jim)



 




Age 62 (64 now), G 3 + 4 = 7, T1C, PSA 4.2, 2/16 cancerous, 27cc. Brachytherapy 12/9/08. 73 Iodine-125 seeds. Procedure went great, catheter out before I went home, only minor discomfort. Everything continues to function normally as of 12/8/10. PSA: 6 mo 1.4, 1 yr. 1.0, 2 yr. .8. My docs are "delighted"! My journey:
http://www.healingwell.com/community/default.aspx?f=35&m=1305643&g=1305643#m1305643

Tony Crispino
Veteran Member


Date Joined Dec 2006
Total Posts : 8128
   Posted 4/7/2011 1:49 PM (GMT -6)   
I think the tone is getting off base. I am sorry for not stepping in sooner I wasn't watching this thread.

It is very important to note that radiation techniques are vastly improved even in the last five years. The radiation guys here have undeniable better results with side effects in the short terms. I have raised concerns about secondary cancers recently but I think I now need to clarify what my concerns were based on ~ the radiation data is still lacking on the newer techniques and the long term data is crucial for a younger man diagnosed with this disease. I was not dismissing the efficacy of radiation therapies nor the advantages that a typical radiation guy has with the early results.

Newporter's comments ring true. We should not be dismissing anyone's therapies or statistically trying to down grade the therapies. We should be encouraged when we see good results and be supportive when we see poor results. The therapy choice should not matter.

Tony
Advanced Prostate Cancer at age 44 (I am 48 now)
pT3b,N0,Mx (original PSA was 19.8) EPE, PM, SVI. Gleason 4+3=7

Treatments:
Da Vinci Surgery ~ 2/16/2007
Adjuvant Radiation Therapy ~ IMRT Completed 8/07
Adjuvant Hormone Therapy ~ 28 months on Casodex and Lupron.
Undetectable PSA.

Blog: www.caringbridge.org/visit/tonycrispino

Dave7
Regular Member


Date Joined Jul 2006
Total Posts : 202
   Posted 4/7/2011 2:31 PM (GMT -6)   
As a geason 6 myself, the information I received prior to treatment was that all options were available and all had similar statistical probability of successfully addressing the cancer.
 
I ended up choosing surgery for the following reasons.
 
1.  Psychologically, I wanted it out.  I knew this was not a logical way to evaluate the treatment options,
     but it's how I felt.
 
2. I wanted the final pathology report.  I wanted something post treatment that would give me an indication of
    the result of treatment.
 
3. I knew about the ED statistics.  I preferred a future that contained hope of any ED improving.  Not a future of waiting
    to see any negative effects from the treatment.
 
I'll just add that I don't really understand the reasoning that surgery is a better choice because there is the availability of radiation if surgery is not successful.  If that's what you're thinking going in, why bother with the surgery.

Purgatory
Elite Member


Date Joined Oct 2008
Total Posts : 25380
   Posted 4/7/2011 3:04 PM (GMT -6)   
dave7:

you said: I'll just add that I don't really understand the reasoning that surgery is a better choice because there is the availability of radiation if surgery is not successful. If that's what you're thinking going in, why bother with the surgery

i am not trying to argue with your view, other than to say, whatever primary treatment we choose, is Plan A, and is normal to have a Plan B in place if Plan A fails. The view of surgery first, radiation second is a very common approach to this line of thinking. Every surgery guy is hoping and praying that the surgery holds, or else they wouldn't want to do it. And for those that take a radiation option as their Plan A, I would like to think they have a valid Plan B in place as well.

Being that my Plan A and Plan B failed, and I already think any Plan C sucks, I feel between a rock and hard place.

Good continual luck in your PC journey.

David in SC
Age: 58, 56 dx, PSA: 7/07 5.8, 10/08 16.3
3rd Biopsy: 9/08 7 of 7 Positive, 40-90%, Gleason 4+3
open RP: 11/08, on catheters for 101 days
Path Rpt: Gleason 3+4, pT2c, 42g, 20% cancer, 1 pos marg
Incont & ED: None
Post Surgery PSA: 2/09 .05,5/09 .1, 6/09 .11. 8/09 .16
Post SRT PSA: 1/10 .12, 4/8 .04, 8/6 .06 2/11 1.24
Latest: 6 Corr Surgeries to Bladder Neck, SP Catheter since 10/1/9, SRT 39 Sess/72 gy ended 11/09, 21 Catheters, Ileal Conduit Surgery 9/10,

Purgatory
Elite Member


Date Joined Oct 2008
Total Posts : 25380
   Posted 4/7/2011 3:05 PM (GMT -6)   
Tud,

Thanks for your well thought out response above to DavidG, I thought it was constructive and balanced, and thank you for you vote of confidence in me as a member of this community.

David in SC
Age: 58, 56 dx, PSA: 7/07 5.8, 10/08 16.3
3rd Biopsy: 9/08 7 of 7 Positive, 40-90%, Gleason 4+3
open RP: 11/08, on catheters for 101 days
Path Rpt: Gleason 3+4, pT2c, 42g, 20% cancer, 1 pos marg
Incont & ED: None
Post Surgery PSA: 2/09 .05,5/09 .1, 6/09 .11. 8/09 .16
Post SRT PSA: 1/10 .12, 4/8 .04, 8/6 .06 2/11 1.24
Latest: 6 Corr Surgeries to Bladder Neck, SP Catheter since 10/1/9, SRT 39 Sess/72 gy ended 11/09, 21 Catheters, Ileal Conduit Surgery 9/10,

BuiDoi
Regular Member


Date Joined Aug 2010
Total Posts : 234
   Posted 4/7/2011 6:07 PM (GMT -6)   
BillyMac said...
why not choose radiation to the gland and surrounding prostate bed as the first line of treatment.


Thanks BillyMac.. You answered your own question with that exact same response as I would have given.

I suspect that NOT ONE of us knows exactly what we have inside us. Even the experts and out advisers, cannot tell us.
We hope and pray that the G6 PC will be confined and not through the prostatic bed. Others have reported that a great many G6'ers, end up as being G7's AFTER the RP, so if they cannot even accurately define the cancer from biopsy, what hope do we mere mortals have.

My surgeon just said "Statistically, with your report, I should be able to deliver a 95% guarantee of FULL and Permanent cure"

I am now 11 Mths Post op and decidedly s ZERO member.. and I still have a "plan B" if it is needed.

Incidently - re the 66% of Rad-ED failure after two years, I think you will find that in the text of the book, but I would have to sit back down and look for it.

Thanks to those making comments about how this discussion is ALL supposed to provide personal opinions and outline other's experiences..

Tudpock18 said...
It is a total myth that there are only back up options to failed surgery but not failed radiation. Failed radiation backups include seeding with a different isotope, HDR brachtherapy, crysurgery and some promising results with HIFU.


Thanks, Tudpock18 for your observations.. My only comment is that following an RP, I have NO radiation exposure to create fears, but should the surgery have left something behind (eg 1 single floating cell (CTC) that lodged in my liver, then I can later consider radiation, as I (please God) will be older.
I am NOT knocking those who chose Radiation, and would just like to see ALL the personal thoughts of those who have gone through it, available to the newly afflicted.

F8 said...
>>The total irony is that those who boastfully declare that they had radiation and they are back at it like rabbits, have something to learn, and they should enjoy it whilst they can...<<<

Buidoi -- i think when you wish ill on other cancer patients you cross a line that requires moderation or suspension.


Do forgive me - I was not intentionally trying to put anyone down, just pointing out that in previous discussions, some have presented their Post-RT bedroom-romps, as clear qualification for RT, whilst leaving out the longer term side effects.
They were as bad as I may have appeared.
I don't think ANYONE here would WISH ill on others, but we cannot ignore the possibilities that come with ALL treatments. BT is probably the most "Comfortable" treatment available, but it is still radiation.

Anyway -I might quit whilst I have a head !
..
.IMHO

Newporter
Regular Member


Date Joined Sep 2010
Total Posts : 225
   Posted 4/7/2011 7:58 PM (GMT -6)   
When I was trying to decide on treatment options, I came across a very positive article on Brachy by one of the founders of Intel Dr. Andrew Grove who did his research and decided on Seed. He had a great outcome. Those of you who is considering Seed should read his journey and decision process. The web page is:

http://www.phoenix5.org/articles/Fortune96Grove.html

Of course I believed at that time that surgery was "The Gold Standard" as Dr. Walsh said.

I also think salvage radiation as second option for surgery is over rated. Dr. Walsh stated that once BCR, salvage radiation's success rate was not high. He actually said the success rate was higher for folks that had positive margin vs those that was organ confined. Make sense to me. For organ confined, BCR means micro-metastasis already whereas positive margin means there are some prostate cells left behind in the prostate bed.
65 Dx June-2010 PSA: 10.7, biopsy: Adenocarcinoma, 1 core Gleason 6, 3 cores atypia; Clinical stage T2; CT, Bone Scan, MRI all negative

8-23-10 Robotic RP; Pathology: Organ confined, negative margins, Lymph nodes, Seminal Vesicle clear; PNI present; multiple Adenocarcinoma sites Gleason 3+3 with tertiary Gleason 4+. Stage: pT2,N0,Mx,R0

Catheter out 8-30-10 no incontinence, no ED. 3/2011 PSA: <.1
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
Forum Information
Currently it is Sunday, June 24, 2018 2:33 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 2,974,761 posts in 326,206 threads.
View Active Threads


Who's Online
This forum has 161300 registered members. Please welcome our newest member, sunvsmoon.
382 Guest(s), 8 Registered Member(s) are currently online.  Details
McKinley, Jianqing Wu, bluelyme, torontolyme, Notime4lyme, browntrout, Sinmiedo, johncl