- Search CSN:
- Members: Login to search all areas
- Not a member? Click here to search public areas
|
May 09, 2013 - 11:19 am
Hi all, Got my 2nd opinion from Johns Hopkins and it's pretty much the same as my original pathology report: 3+3=6. One core, but where the original says 10% involvement the new one says less than 5% involvement. It also says something I don't understand except that it probably means it could be cancer or not. I am waiting for my urologist to get back to me on it: "Separate high grade pin with adjacent small atypical glands where it is difficult to determine whether these adjacent small atypical glands represent outpouchings from adjacent high grade pin or represent associated focal infiltrating adenocarcinoma." Anybody understand this? Also had a consult with radiation oncologist yesterday who is recommending CyberKnife radiation treatment. I am taking the wait and see approach at least until I can decide between radiation and surgery. I'm not exactly thrilled with either but the CyberKnife right now sounds a bit better as far as possible side effects. He told me that all three treatments - surgery, Brachytherapy radiation and CyberKnife have equal results and that I'd probably choose which one based on the side effects I feel I can handle. Any comments/advice? Thanks, Michael
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Results
Michael,
PIN stands for prostatic intraepithellal neoplasia which is basically a cell that doesn't look much like a normal prostate cell under a microscope but it's not defined enough to actually be classifed as a prostate cancer cell. Pathologists do not believe that prostate cancer cells spontaneously appear...like poof: -- yesterday everything is okay but today these prostate cancer cells just appeared from nowhere! While they don't know exactly what causes prostate cancer after looking at millions and millions of biopsy core samples they figured out that certain types of cell classifications, PIN being one of them, generally are present when prostate cancer is first detected. In other words its sort of a transition cell evolving from a normal, healthy prostate cell to one that can clearly be identified as cancerous. So what the pathologist is saying is that there are some cells that look pretty much as if they are evolving into cancer cells but we can't call them that yet.
As you know, reading prostate cancer biopsy slides is a subjective skill. Sending your slides off to Johns Hopkins can now give you peace of mind that you really have what you have..
I think you are prudent to be seeking second opinions and researching your options. In addition to surgery or some form of radiation, you may also want to learn about active surveillance. With your very low risk diagnosis why would you risk the side effects of any potential treatment if you don't have to? I hope you add an oncologist that specializes in active surveillance for prostate cancer patient to your list of experts to visit while you are considering your options.
In 2010 with a similar diagnosis I chose to treat my prostate cancer with CyberKnife after much research and visiting six specialists. I have had no side effects with any type of continence, urgency, or impotence. The cancer appears to have been eradicated, and my PSA scores are steady at less than 1.0 ng/ml. (With radiation your PSA never goes to zero because you still have a prostate which will continue to produce some small amount of PSA). If you do end up choosing this option I would have some additional recommendations about fiducial placement and frequency of treatment so please stay in touch.
Good luck!
K
Joined: Mar 2013
Results
Thanks Kongo for your response. I appreciate your (as always) knowledgeable advice and will definitely stay in touch as my situation changes. I will check further into the active surveillance option. I would prefer that (if I can manage to get around the idea of the cancer definitely growing in my body).
Thanks again,
Mike.
Joined: Oct 2013
Cyber
I too am contemplating Cyberknife. I have 3/12 cores of 3+3 =6 ... All less than 25%' but 2 others "abnormal". Also T1.
Do you know who might be considered the top doctors for Cyber?
I am in Reno. there's a Dr Kos here who does it.
Thanks!
Joined: Oct 2013
I was wrong
I just found out that Dr. Kos does not do cyber knife. He does Calypso. Here in Reno, there's a Dr. Tay who does cyber knife. However, I have insurance problems in that He is out of my network.
Boy oh boy, what a mess.
Joined: Mar 2013
CyberKnife
Sorry, Jerry. I don't know of any doctors in your neck of the woods who do CyberKnife. In any event, I decided against it and chose surgery instead.
Hope you get the mess untangled so you can make a decision.
Joined: Apr 2010
Treatment dilemma?