Treatment Decision

Seymore76
Seymore76 Member Posts: 11 Member
edited July 19 in Prostate Cancer #1

Am 63 and have been dealing with a rising PSA that started at 5.5 over the last couple of years. In 22 I had a Biopsy done with no Cancer cells found. PSA continued to rise and hit 10.5 this year. Biopsy found Cancer cells in 20% of the right side samples. Gleason score came back as 4+4. Options are Surgery without Nerve sparing or Radiation with Hormone Therapy. I have been doing as much reading as I can and there are pros and cons of both. Surgery seems to offer better odds down the road but Radiation seems to offer better quality of life. I am struggling with which way to go. Any advice or research would be awesome.

«1

Comments

  • centralPA
    centralPA Member Posts: 322 Member

    What did your MRI find? I’m surprised a the jump directly to surgery without nerve sparing, and therefore permanent ED. Something must have shown up…

  • Clevelandguy
    Clevelandguy Member Posts: 1,177 Member
    edited July 16 #3

    Hi,

    If it was me I would be asking your doctor team why they can’t do nerve sparing surgery. Do you have Perineurial invasion or positive margins? A second opinion might be in order with different doctors/hospital network. If the cancer has invaded the nerve bundles a PMSA PET scan might be in order to check for spread outside of the Prostate. Both surgery and radiation have side effects, you have to determine based on your set of circumstances which is best for you.

    Dave 3+4

  • Seymore76
    Seymore76 Member Posts: 11 Member

    T rying to post the report findings see if this test works

  • Seymore76
    Seymore76 Member Posts: 11 Member

    Findings: Multi-parametric, multi-pulse pre-and post contrast MR imaging of the pelvis with attention to the prostate gland was performed. Patient received 15 mL Dotarem contrast for the exam.

    The prostate gland measures 3.1 x 5.1 x 4.5 cm, yielding a prostate volume of 37mL.

    Benign-appearing nodular hyperplasia of the transitional zone.

    No suspicious nodular zone finding identified.

    0.9 x 0.6 cm focus of T2 hypointensity involving the anterior left peripheral zone at the mid gland. There is moderately decreased ADC and moderately increased degenerative signal intensity. This is best visualized on axial image 16 of series 401.

    Normal MRI appearance of the anterior fibromuscular stroma, central zone, and seminal vericles.

    No bladder lesion appreciated.

    No visualized significant bone lesions or lymphadenopathy.

    No concerning incidental findings appreciated. Mild colonic diverticulosis.

    IMPRESSION:

    BPH with estimated prostate volume of 37mL

  • Seymore76
    Seymore76 Member Posts: 11 Member

    Here are the Path results.

    A. PROSTATE, LEFT CENTRAL ZONE (BIOPSY):– PROSTATIC ADENOCARCINOMA, GLEASON GRADE 4+4 = 8, INVOLVING 20% OF THE TISSUE SUBMITTED– NO PERINEURAL INVASION IDENTIFIED– NO LYMPHATIC/VASCULAR INVASION IDENTIFIED 

    B. PROSTATE, RIGHT CENTRAL ZONE (BIOPSY):– GLANDULAR AND FIBROMUSCULAR HYPERPLASIA– NO EVIDENCE OF ATYPIA OR MALIGNANCY

  • Seymore76
    Seymore76 Member Posts: 11 Member

    Bone Scan findings.

    CONCLUSION:
    1. No scintigraphic evidence to suspect the presence of osseous metastatic disease.

    Narrative

    EXAMINATION: Total body bone scan
    CLINICAL HISTORY: Prostate cancer
    COMPARISON EXAMINATIONS: none
    DOSE: 23.4 mCi of technetium labeled MDP (I.V.)
    TECHNIQUE: Total body scan, anterior and posterior projections

    FINDINGS:

    The uptake and distribution of radiotracer activity demonstrates:

    A physiologic distribution for a patient of this age.

    There is no scintigraphic evidence to suggest the presence of osseous metastatic disease.

    The kidneys are visualized bilaterally.

  • Marlon
    Marlon Member Posts: 110 Member

    My experience. At 67, my urologist said I would likely have equally good results with either radiation or surgery. There would have been side effects with either, and the long treatment period for IMRT was a factor to consider. I chose surgery because I wanted the cancer out as quickly as possible. And it immediately relieved the BPH symptoms that I initially went in for. But make no mistake, it's major surgery. I am 3.5 weeks out from it and the recovery was more painful and debilitating than I expected. Incontinence is getting better and hopefully temporary. But I am glad I did surgery because if it comes back, I still have radiation as an option for follow up treatment.

  • Seymore76
    Seymore76 Member Posts: 11 Member

    According to the Oncologist if I decided to do Radiation and it came back Additional treatment would still be possible. With the hormone therapy it is a 2 year process. Surgery on the other hjand will be a 6 month process as they want hormone therapy as well. Leakage and ED are the 2 things I am concerned with for the surgery option.

    Sey.

  • Wheel
    Wheel Member Posts: 138 Member

  • Wheel
    Wheel Member Posts: 138 Member

    I went back and forth between Radiation and Surgery. I am 70 and decided Surgery next month. All in prostate , no lymph no involvement. 13 core Biopsy showed 5 cores Gleason 6, one core Gleason 7 (3+4), and one Gleason 8 (4+4) 10 % involvement. Decipher intermediate . My staging is IIC , cT1c NOMO. I am upstaged because of just the one core of Gleason 8. I personally don’t feel just because you have one Gleason 8 you should go up with Gleason 9 and 10’s high grade. I feel even just one Gleason 8 is not like having 8 cores of Gleason 8 heavy percentage in the cores. I again personally feel they are not making enough allowance for that in treatment protocols. Remember it wasn’t that long ago their was no active surveillance and they aggressively even went after Gleason 6, not understanding and having all the access ro genomic testing that mught show its likely to grow slowly. It definitely is about quality of life and treatment protocols have evolved to not necessarily go immediately after the cancer depending on its grade and continue to look more at quality of life. My initial direction was radiation thinking it would give me a better quality of life but then learned about the hormone treatments for 2 years and their side effects and reevaluated my thought process. The surgery recovery is basically healed in three weeks and you are up and around before then but clearly have the side effects which clearly improve over the next months except ED for maybe quite awhile even with nerve sparring. I don’t feel needing to wear or change pads while I get better is going to be as much detrimental to everything about doing things being active and getting around in daily life as Radiation because you are on the hormone treatment likely for at least two years. In addition although they are saying after healing from surgery will likely need adjuvant radiation and hormone treatment due to my having one Gleason 8, I feel it seems you could defer on that until it actually returns then do salvage treatment. Many articles discuss lack of enough studies to truly show substantial long term survival benefits over immediate adjuvant treatment and waiting for salvage treatment that the difference in outcomes might not be as significant for quality of life in waiting. Finally for me was no one knows how Radiation and hormone treatment might affect your overall health in years to come and then you might not be eligible for Surgery. The consensus is still salvage Surgery after Radiation is much more complicated if able too although possible, but no issues if Surgery first and Salvage Radiation later.
    I had non Hodgkin’s lymphoma 20 years ago and upon relapse my ONC wanted me to go on two year maintenance of Rituxan every 6 months, which was being pushed and the big thing. Then there were different opinions on whether receiving 4 weekly doses, 6 or even 8 doses. However one ONC from UCLA believed overusing Rituxan although it showed good response rates, it was too soon to know long term benefit outcomes versus continuous suppression of your immune system and maybe loss of effectiveness of an outstanding drug for lymphoma. His recommendation was just one 4 week course, no maintenance and if returns can then retreat if necessary. Have had no further treatment for 16 years, but who knows if I had gone on to receive so much. That’s why I am inclined after surgery to just wait and if it returns then go with the Salvage Radiation. It clearly is a difficult decision which direction and what one person decides could very well be different under the same circumstances what another person decides. Good luck.

  • Old Salt
    Old Salt Member Posts: 1,505 Member

    Seymore: We still haven't heard why the proposed surgery would be non nerve sparing…

    PS: I don't think that 2 years of hormone treatment is the current recommendation for a case like yours if you choose radiation. I would quiz your radiation oncologist whether 18 months isn't equally effective.

  • Seymore76
    Seymore76 Member Posts: 11 Member

    Old Salt. Other than I am not a candidate because the cancer is too aggressive per the surgeon. He wants to make sure to have clear margins. All I was told and no other reason

    Sey.

  • centralPA
    centralPA Member Posts: 322 Member
    edited July 18 #14

    Your biopsy…PROSTATE, LEFT CENTRAL ZONE (BIOPSY):– PROSTATIC ADENOCARCINOMA, GLEASON GRADE 4+4 = 8, INVOLVING 20% OF THE TISSUE SUBMITTED– NO PERINEURAL INVASION IDENTIFIED– NO LYMPHATIC/VASCULAR INVASION IDENTIFIED 

    With the central zone being the part that is positive, I wonder that a local (edit: focal) therapy wouldn’t work. PCa typically shows up in the Peripheral Zone, with concern being that it is crossing the periphery into the adjoining tissue. The central zone is inside the peripheral zone and the transitional zone. For example, in my HoLEP procedure, they completely removed the central and transitional zone. It wasn’t done to cure my cancer, but if the cancer was there, it was removed.

    just thinking out loud… I expect there is additional information that makes this a bad idea. Could be worth a consult just to check it out though.

  • Seymore76
    Seymore76 Member Posts: 11 Member

    I believe what you are referring to is a simple prosectomy. I asked about this and and told it is not an option. When asked why not I was told it is because of the aggressiveness of the cancer.

    Sey.

  • Wheel
    Wheel Member Posts: 138 Member

    Sey,

    How many cores were taken in the biopsy and how many were Gleason 8?

  • centralPA
    centralPA Member Posts: 322 Member

    No, I’m referring to focal therapy, like cryosurgery or TULSA. I edited my post to correct above. But after more reading, it is not recommended for Gleason 8 and higher at this time.

  • Old Salt
    Old Salt Member Posts: 1,505 Member
    edited July 18 #18

    Even though one lesion (Gleason 4+4) isn't good of course, there are still a number of options other than surgery, as you know.

    Have you considered getting a second opinion? I suggest you discuss your case with a radiation oncologist with experience in prostate cancer.

  • Seymore76
    Seymore76 Member Posts: 11 Member

    There is no indication of how many cores of the 10 showed cancer. I am working on setting up a second opinion. Just waiting on the appointment.

  • centralPA
    centralPA Member Posts: 322 Member

    What was the timing of your MRI? I’m surprised they were just 10 cores, but the MRI results you posted above didn’t show any activity. I’m wondering if your MRI was back in 2022 before the first biopsy.