"non-invasive (well, relatively)"
HA! Lost a little coffee thru my nose on that one. During our trip with anal cancer, we quickly realized there is a virtually endless supply of ass jokes. Some folks don't know how to react to such bad fortune but humor was a good coping mechanism for us. Humor will always be part of our glass half full philosophy, lose it and risk becoming enveloped by that dark cloud of cynicism. No thanks!
"Humor is reason gone mad." ~Groucho Marx
And I do recognize the RO vs. EPIC reported results quandary. I am always on the alert
for potential skewing. In this trial though, I think it was large enough thru a great many facilities and so controlled as to preclude that possibility of significant skew by the ROs. I also do wonder exactly how much stock should be put into the QoL questionnaire when you typically get less than 100% participation. Like online 'surveys', the most likely to respond are probably those that feel a need to belly-ache. I get so darn many survey requests I blow by the vast majority. Besides, it took a while to read all your blog posts!
59@dx - no family PCa history
01/17 - 5.65 PSA, DRE+ Rt Base node at routine physical
04/17 - 6.67 PSA, cT2a at Uro consult
06/17 - TRUS-Bx 6/14 cores+, all G(3+4)=7; 10%x2,60%,70%,90%x2; PNI+Cribriform Morphology
08/17 - CT, Bone Scan Neg; MRI Pending