I just received news from UCSF that I am a candidiate for active surveillance due to an analysis called "oncotype" by a company called Genomics. (I had a Gleason 6 (3+3) in 3 cores.  )

Does anyone out there have experience with this analysis?







  • hopeful and optimistic
    hopeful and optimistic Member Posts: 2,333 Member
    Dear Jerry,

    As a lay person who has been following an Active Surveillance protocol for the last five years,    I am familiar with Active Surveillance requirements, and the Genomics test, which I as well have had done.


    In order to give specific information about your case, more information is required by us; your age, how many cores were taken, percent involvement of cancer, that is the amount of cancer that was found in  each  of the three cores  that was positive, PSA history, DRE normal?, was the second opinion results of your pathology the same as the original pathology results. Any other diagnostic tests....results?


    What were the finding in  your Genomics report?




    At the about me page I've listed the history of all my tests which you may wish to review. Additionally other pertinent information germaine to Active Surveillance is also listed.

  • VascodaGama
    VascodaGama Member Posts: 3,598 Member
    Genomics DX


    I like to the way you are analysing your PCa case. It seems that you found and settled on AS to deal with it. This is excellent but it needs continuous vigilance and a commitment to treatment if thinks progress. Your age, test results and some other factors are important in the decision, but up to date you did not share any details. H&O above is the best guy to help you in understanding the facts.

    I hope you luck in your journey.

    Here is the link of your previous thread; http://csn.cancer.org/node/263777


  • Swingshiftworker
    Swingshiftworker Member Posts: 1,017 Member
    Technological Advancements


    Never heard about this before, even though my PCa was treated w/CK at UCSF in Sep 2010, but looking at the company's historical summary, it's not surprising because the company did not make the push to use it's oncotype DX prostate cancer test until Jan 2011.

    Here's a link to a video about the reason for the test: http://www.genomichealth.com/en-US/Company/Perspectives.aspx#.UxlnvIX5A85

    And, here's a link to the company's historical developments: http://www.genomichealth.com/en-US/Company/History.aspx#.UxloIYX5A84

    Makes me wonder what my oncotype result might have been BUT, since my PCa is now apparently in complete remission w/o any negative side effects, I'm happy with the result of the treatment and am glad that I have not had to "monitor" the status of the cancer w/o treatment for the past 4 years just using active surveillance

    However, if CK had not been available in 2010, I probably would have opted for AS because of the existence of the AS program at UCSF and my very negative opinion about the surgical treatment of PCa and the other radiological options available at that time AND, given the time frame, I probably would have ended up getting a oncotype test about a year after I would have had to make that decision, which may or may not have changed my decision to undergo treatment for my PCa.

    Just goes to prove how technological advancements can change the types of decisions and choices that we have to make in dealing with this disease.