a lurker
|
From: Just on 28 Jul 2008 09:49 On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 15:55:02 -0400, "Steve Kramer" >> I thought I should mention my PSA level though, to indirectly >> emphasize the importance (I believe) of going into SRT with a pretty >> low PSA. > >I concur. I firmly believe aggressive therapy is the key to sustaining >life. Well... I agree if / when it is +/- clear that aggressive therapy is more effective than less aggressive alternatives... In the case of SRT there seems to be a case for aggressive therapy. Just
From: I.P. Freely on 28 Jul 2008 19:16 Steve Kramer wrote: > <rosbif> wrote in message news:m8mk849vm9tjrtaeo5v1caak595ga8p904(a)4ax.com... >> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:49:52 -0700, "I.P. Freely" >> <fuhgheddaboutit(a)noway.nohow> wrote: >> >>> I still hope that if/when my PC does return, the >>> supersensitive tests will give me some extra time for research and >>> introspection before action is clearly required. >> >> But at what value would action be clearly required? >> > > Again, assuming post-surgery and pre-radiation, my doctor was aggressive > when he signed me up for radiation when I hit 0.37. I don't think anyone on > the NG had RT with less than 0.37.... Maybe those without negative margins. > Most people, especially those who had this before me, started radiation > about 1.0. Of course, doctors vary. My onc told me to start worrying @ 0.10 and the classic action point is @ 0.20, at least with my G-8 and SVI. But he also says SRT would help my odds, which I gather is mighty optimistic in my case, so I'm guessing he's playing it very conservative. I.P.
From: I.P. Freely on 28 Jul 2008 19:18 Larry Sabo wrote: > I did not have negative margins, unfortunately. Your positive margins raise the odds that your recurrence is local and thus subject to SRT. Could be a good thing. I.P.
From: I.P. Freely on 28 Jul 2008 19:22 Just wrote: > > In the case of SRT there seems to be a case for aggressive therapy. In my case -- G8, SVI, neg margins -- SRT is of dubious value, thus may warrant yet another tough decision regarding whether and when. I.P.
From: rosbif on 7 Aug 2008 10:57
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 15:14:28 +0100, Just <here(a)anon.com> wrote: >On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:20:49 -0400, "Steve Kramer" ><skramer(a)cinci.rr.com> wrote: > >>Again, assuming post-surgery and pre-radiation, my doctor was aggressive >>when he signed me up for radiation when I hit 0.37. I don't think anyone on >>the NG had RT with less than 0.37.... Maybe those without negative margins. >>Most people, especially those who had this before me, started radiation >>about 1.0. Of course, doctors vary. > > >"I don't think anyone on the NG had RT with less than 0.37": not >really... please see my data below. > > >Pre RRP PSA: 18.5 > >RRP: March 1999 >Extra-capsular extension: negative >Lymph node involvement: negative >Seminal vesicle involvement: negative >Perineural invasion: negative >Surgical margins: negative > > >PSA: >Until March 2001: <0.04 >March 2001: 0.04 >October 2001: 0.07 >January 2002: 0.10 >January 2002: 0.06 (one week later) >April 2002: 0.05 (different Lab; different assay). >October 2002: 0.08 >April 2003: 0.10 >November 2003: 0.12. >February 2004: 0.13. >June 2004: 0.14 >November 2004: 0.18 >March 2005: 0.21 > >SRT: March - May 2005 >65 gy (45 gy to the pelvic area + 20 gy to the prostatic fossa) > >PSA until now: <0.02 > > >best wishes. > >Just Thanks for posting this - it looks like SRT did the trick - excellent! May your low PSAs continue indefinitely. |