Tag: prostate cancer treatment

Day 5,522 – Urologist Appointment

On By DanIn Hormone Therapy, imaging, Prostate Cancer, Treatment9 Comments

Late last week, I received a text message asking if I would like to move my urologist appointment from 30 December to today, 23 December, and I agreed.

My appointment was at 3:15 p.m., and I arrived around 2:45 p.m. As I’m walking up to the check-in kiosk, my cell phone rings, and it was the urology department wanting to confirm that I’d be there. That’s the first time that that’s happened, and I told the nurse that I was checking in as we spoke. “Great! We’ll come out and get you.” Apparently, they were antsy to get out of there early on the day before Christmas Eve. So was I.

The head of the department was the one who saw me this time, and we had a really good conversation. Some of the key takeaways:

  • She was concerned about the increase in my PSA but not panicked, even initially suggesting we just continue to monitor it.
  • We talked at length about doing another round of imaging to see if we can determine the location of the cancer.
  • We agreed to do another PSMA PET scan, and we negotiated doing one in March 2026. (She thought that Nuclear Medicine might push back on doing one sooner, i.e., within a year, as the last one I had was in March 2025.) She also mentioned the possibilities of other imaging should the PSMA PET scan come up with no evidence of cancer/metastasis for the fourth time.
  • We talked about the timing of starting androgen deprivation (hormone) therapy. She wouldn’t start it until there was evidence of metastasis, but was open to starting it earlier if I really wanted to do so.
  • Lastly, we reviewed my stress incontinence and nocturia issues and talked about my pelvic floor physical therapy.

It was one of the more thorough discussions that I’ve had at the VA, and I’m okay with the plan coming out of the meeting. I’ll go for another PSA test on 1 March; hopefully get the PSMA PET scan scheduled in early March; and have a follow-up with the urologist on 24 March.

I’m glad I got this out of the way before the holiday. I’ve got my answers, plus it frees up next week for me to go out an play if I want.

Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and be well!

Header image: Hotel del Coronado at Christmas, Coronado, California

September is Prostate Cancer Awareness Month

On By DanIn Prostate CancerLeave a comment

It’s that time of year again. It’s time to remember that September is Prostate Cancer Awareness Month, and you should take a little time to educate yourself about this disease that’s been impacting my life for nearly 14 years.

Here are some great free resources to learn more about the disease and its treatment:

Of course, I’d like to think this little ol’ blog of mine has been a pretty decent resource, too. (Shameless self-promotion.)

Please take some time in September to increase your awareness about prostate cancer before you get diagnosed. Understand the risks—family history, race, age, diet—and how they may influence your decision to get screened for prostate cancer.

Be well!

Month 162 – Urologist Visit

On By DanIn Hormone Therapy, Prostate Cancer, Radiation Therapy, Recurrence4 Comments

The short version from yesterday’s appointment with the urologist (who happens to be the Urology Department head):

Kick the proverbial can(cer) six months down the road and retest PSA then.

Generally speaking, I’m okay with that approach. I mean, really, what else is there to do at this point? We don’t have sufficient data points to make any definitive treatment decisions right now. Of course, I may feel differently after sleeping on this for a few nights.

I have to admit that it was a challenging meeting because the doctor just wanted to rapid-fire through all the discussion points and it was difficult to get my questions out. In the end, though, I prevailed.

She was blasé about the increase in my PSA, saying it went up “a little bit.” (A 41% increase in my mind is a tad beyond “a little bit,” but what do I know?) She didn’t see much value in doing another PSMA PET scan right now because a scan with a PSA of 0.52 ng/mL has about a 50-50 chance of detecting anything. That somewhat aligns with what the medical oncologist (MO) said in February—that it would be better to wait until my PSA was at least 0.7 or 0.8 before doing another scan.

My SWAG (scientific wild-assed guess) is that my PSA will be between 0.75 ng/mL and 1.1 ng/mL in November based on the average increases in my PSA over the last four readings and my PSA doubling time. (Bookmark this prediction for future reference! 😀)

We did talk about androgen deprivation therapy. Her biggest concern was that starting too early would just accelerate the eventual likelihood of resistance later on when ADT is needed the most, so she wouldn’t start ADT until there’s confirmed metastasis. (By comparison, the MO suggested holding off until my PSA hit 2.0 ng/mL.) I did ask if starting ADT early delays metastasis and she said it didn’t, which I thought was interesting.

We talked about whether it would be a monotherapy or a combination therapy, and she suspected we would start with just a monotherapy. She acknowledged that there are several studies out there showing that a combination therapy may lead to better outcomes but, in her mind, they weren’t persuasive enough to launch straight into combination therapy. However, she did say that there are certain circumstances where it may make sense, one of which was if the metastases was in the spine.

I asked about possible radiation of localized lesions and she was not all that enthusiastic about the idea. Her biggest concern was about going through radiation twice and whether that was a wise thing given what damage it may do to my body. “I’d have to defer to the radiation oncologist to make that assessment,” she said. Her fear was additional radiation damage / side effects, and I would have that same concern, too. I would have to consider very carefully zapping anywhere in the pelvic area again given the changes I have already experienced in my bowel habits.

Even if the scan showed one or two lesions that could be zapped, she would also start ADT because “it’s pretty much guaranteed that there would be cancer elsewhere that didn’t light up on the scan.” That makes sense.

Lastly, given where I’m at in this advanced prostate cancer no-man’s land, I was curious how she would label or stage my cancer. With no evidence of metastases on the last scan, she would still have me at Stage 2. (See the American Cancer Society staging of prostate cancer HERE.)

Of course, in my mind, I turned to the actual definition of metastasis:

the spread of a disease-producing agency (such as cancer cells) from the initial or primary site of disease to another part of the body

I don’t have a prostate (initial or primary site) but I do have evidence of cancer, so it must be in “another part of the body.” By that definition, it must mean that I’m metastatic, right? (Yeah, I know… Nothing in the prostate cancer world is that clear.)

I asked the question about staging more as an academic exercise because it really doesn’t matter much what the label or stage is. All I know is that I’m living with this bug growing inside me.

One of my blog followers, Phil, recently commented that his oncologist considered prostate cancer to be more of a chronic illness than a terminal illness, and that stuck with me. I mentioned that to the doctor, and she embraced that view wholeheartedly, telling me that patients like me can be kept around for many years—even decades—and the disease can be managed like hypertension or diabetes.

Intellectually, I already knew that. But, after 13+ years, it’s quite the mental leap to jump from, “I have the Big C and it continues to grow unabated,” to, “Cancer, schmancer. It’s like arthritis in my big toe. No big deal.” But it is a leap I’m trying to make.

You would expect that, after 13+ years of testing, waiting for results, reviewing results, and planning next steps, I’d be used to it by now. It’s routine. But I’m finding it to be more and more emotionally draining with each cycle as the uncertainty drags on. Perhaps it’s because I’m coming to terms with failed treatments when I had hopes for better outcomes, or perhaps it’s because I’m back in the wait-and-see mode. Or maybe it’s just the cumulative effect of being on this roller coaster for so long.

On the positive side, I know that I’ve been blessed. Many fellow prostate cancer patients would love to have their PSAs be at my level; my quality of life is pretty good considering all that my body has been through; and—most important—I’m still here 13+ years after diagnosis.

On a somewhat related note, I finally got my baseline testosterone results back: 424 ng/dL. That was taken almost two years to the day after receiving my six-month Eligard shot in advance of salvage radiation therapy, so I’m guessing that any effect the Eligard may have had on my testosterone level has worn off by now.

From what I can tell, that’s a decent / normal number for a 66-year-old guy.

At least we have a starting point for reference now.

Well, that’s it for this post. Time to go out and play for six months. Be well!

What’s next:

  • Week of 28 October – Get PSA test
  • 4 November – Physical with primary care physician
  • 14 November – Appointment with urologist

Header Image: La Jolla Coast, San Diego, California

Treating Lymph Node #ProstateCancer Metastases | MarkScholzMD

On By DanIn Prostate CancerLeave a comment

Here’s another timely (for me) and educational video from Dr. Scholz and the Prostate Cancer Research Institute.

I have an appointment with the medical oncologist on 19 March, and this has given me a good foundation for the discussion.

Study finds prostate cancer treatment can wait for most men

On By DanIn Prostate Cancer, Treatment2 Comments

I saw this on the national news last night and thought the results of the study were interesting:

The study directly compared the three approaches — surgery to remove tumors, radiation treatment and monitoring. Most prostate cancer grows slowly, so it takes many years to look at the disease’s outcomes.


“There was no difference in prostate cancer mortality at 15 years between the groups,” Loeb said. And prostate cancer survival for all three groups was high — 97% regardless of treatment approach. “That’s also very good news.”

That’s going to make a whole lot of guys go, “Huh?!?” The science may say it’s okay to do nothing, but once you hear “cancer,” it will be extraordinarily difficult to not want to do something more proactive. It will be interesting to see if guys stop or cut back on getting screened, and we wind up with more men being diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer instead of localized prostate cancer because they delayed screening.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/study-finds-prostate-cancer-treatment-can-wait-men-rcna74512

Here is the New England Journal of Medicine article (I didn’t sign up for full access):

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2214122

Watch “A Medical Oncologist Compares Surgery and Radiation for Prostate Cancer| Mark Scholz, MD | PCRI” on YouTube

On By DanIn Prostate Cancer, Radiation Therapy, Side Effects, Surgery9 Comments

This is an informative video that would benefit the newly diagnosed prostate cancer patient.

It talks about some of the more recent advances in radiation therapies that really should be considered when making a treatment decision.

Day 2,722 – No Probability for Me

On By DanIn Prostate Cancer, Recurrence, Treatment9 Comments

I’m one of those people who always thinks of a snappy comeback—three days after the conversation.

Over the weekend, I reflected on my conversation with the doctor last Thursday, and one of the things that I failed to ask was what probability he would assign to the notion that my increasing PSA is attributable to benign residual prostate tissue instead of returning cancer. I sent an email that asked specifically:

I fully understand that none of us have a crystal ball, but the one thing that I failed to ask Dr. is what he thought the probability of this being benign residual tissue was. Is it 5%? 25%? 50%? His experience gave him the insights to make the comment, so his experience may also be able to measure the likelihood as well.

To which he replied:

I’m afraid I am not able to assign a percentage likelihood to the chance that any residual tissue is benign. I can only really extrapolate from the rate of change in the PSA. The longer it took to be detectable and the slower it rises, the more it seems likely to be a bit of benign tissue. Either way, it is those lab values and their pattern that will help to guide treatment. If it rises quickly then will treat, since a) that pattern is more likely cancer, and b) if it’s not cancer it is acting like cancer and the stakes are too high to disregard even with a high % prediction at this point that the tissue is benign.

Hope that helps!

Dr.

His comment, “…b) if it’s not cancer it is acting like cancer and the stakes are too high to disregard even with a high % prediction at this point that the tissue is benign,” seems to be all over the place and contradicts his opening statement of not being “able to assign a percentage likelihood.” Hmmm…

So that was an interesting little exercise. I really didn’t expect him to come back with a specific number, but I thought I’d ask anyway. I don’t know that his answer convincingly persuades me one way or the other, but it does allow me to throw a tad more weight behind his theory that this is benign. A tad.

Bottom line: The only thing we know with any certainty is that my PSA continues to climb. Beyond that, it’s all a freaking guessing game.

On a related note, I’ve yet to hear from the radiation oncology department with an appointment for me. If I don’t hear from them tomorrow or Thursday (a crazy day at work for me), I’ll try to call on Friday to get on the calendar.

UPDATE:

About an hour after posting this, I came across this little gem of an article from 2005:

The presence of benign prostatic glandular tissue at surgical margins does not predict PSA recurrence

Key points:

We conclude that the presence of benign prostatic tissue at the surgical margins is not associated with adverse prognostic features and does not have prognostic relevance; therefore, we do not advocate reporting the presence of benign prostatic tissue at the inked margins as a standard part of the surgical pathology report on prostatectomy specimens.

Because benign epithelium at surgical margins is not correlated with postoperative PSA rises, postoperative PSA increases should in most cases continue to be considered “biochemical failure”.

Obviously, that’s not good news and certainly warrants more research.

This article from 2013 calls a few things into question:

Benign Prostate Glandular Tissue at Radical Prostatectomy Surgical Margins

Key point:

The most interesting finding of this study is the identification of Benign Glands at the Surgical Margins (BGM) after both Open Radical Prostatectomy (ORP) and Robot Assisted Laproscopic Radical Prostatectomy (RALRP) was not associated with recurrence, either biochemical or clinical, during a median follow-up interval of 49 months after ORP and 28 months after RALRP.

Extending followup further should clarify whether BGM leads to low, detectable levels of PSA that may not meet threshold for defining biochemical failure. This may be particularly relevant with the widespread availability of ultra-sensitive PSA assays. The routine use of ultra-sensitive tests after treatment has not been validated and remains controversial in clinical practice, and may be particularly true in patients at low risk of disease recurrence and potentially in those with BGM.

Within our cohort, longer follow-up may reveal detectable levels of PSA associated with BGM that may not reflect actual prostate cancer recurrence but rather a clinically benign elevation of PSA.

In other words, there’s more research to be done.