It's not about
wanting to withhold information or to prevent a "cure" so they can continue to charge for treatments. Neither medicine or science deal in absolutes. The language of science is statistics - e.g., based on your particular data you can be compared to others with similar data and then it may be possible to say something like "we can say with 95 percent confidence that your probability of being recurrence free at 6, or, 10, or 15 years is x percent." That's just the way it works, and I am happier with an explanation like that than something as ambiguous as "I think your cured."
You can choose appropriate nomograms that apply to your particular PCa history and plug in your numbers to get a percentage probability of recurrence at a particular time in the future. For many people, depending on their individual PCa history they will find that the probability of being recurrence-free at 10 or more years is very high -- e.g., 90 percent or more, which means that they are very unlikely to die of PCa, which is as close to a cure as statistical models allow.prostate-cancer.org/prostate-cancer-algorithmsnomograms/nomograms.mskcc.org/Prostate/index.aspx
-DX March 2002 - PSA 9.4, 5 of 10 cores positive - 30-50%.
-RP April 2002. PT3B N0 MX Gleason=7 (3+4), 75% left lobe; small focus right lobe.
-Post-surgery PSA low of 0.01; slow rise to 0.4 (August 2009).
-SRT Jan/Feb 2010. Enlarged lymph node near prostate bed targeted. Casodex 3 months during SRT
-PSA 0.00 Apr 2013; <0.02 Sep 2013 (new lab); Apr 2014 0.00