I'm interested in conversations about and I want to talk about
Know exactly what you want?
Show search

Notification

Error
ο»Ώ
<123

So worried

User
Posted 20 Sep 2020 at 10:08

Glad to hear things have gone well. Long may that be the case.

 

Ido4

User
Posted 20 Sep 2020 at 11:33

Great news, and thanks for the update.

User
Posted 20 Sep 2020 at 13:30

Great to hear such good news xx

User
Posted 20 Sep 2020 at 14:09

Excellent newsπŸ‘

User
Posted 20 Sep 2020 at 23:53
Great update!
"Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards." Soren Kierkegaard

User
Posted 18 Jan 2022 at 19:23

Hi everyone, I haven’t been on in ages, hope everyone is ok.  3 years post op now and PSA is still undetectable. 

User
Posted 18 Jan 2022 at 19:27

Really good news πŸ‘

User
Posted 18 Jan 2022 at 19:37
Great to see your update πŸ‘
"Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards." Soren Kierkegaard

User
Posted 22 Jan 2022 at 14:00

Fabulous update, long may it continue.

Just read through this whole thread, everything you described in the early days was just exactly how I was. Every little thing I was paranoid about 🀦🏻‍♀️ interesting that someone posted how they got a bit sick of their wife asking if they were ok every 5 mins 🀦🏻‍♀️ definitely something I will have to look to change in myself!!

Lyn also a comment that you made about how it is possible to have lymph node involvement but still contained within the prostate. This is obviously the situation we find ourselves in and it really confuses me and just wondered if you could provide any further explanation. We were told no ENE and no lymphovascular invasion was noted (histology after RALP). Is it still possible for the op to be curative? Or is it very likely for micro mets to be in lymph system? 

Thanks for any help 

 

 

User
Posted 22 Jan 2022 at 15:49

I think it is because we imagine the cancer growing inside the prostate and then bursting out of the covering to then climb across to a lymph node or a bone. It doesn't work like that.

The cancer can burst out of the gland and invade other things close by, such as the bladder, bowel or pelvic muscles. Or it can stay in the prostate and look quite small but blood and lymphatic fluid both travel through the prostate and it is possible for the flowing liquid to pick up cancer cells and then carry them away. If the lymphatic fluid picks up some cancer cells, these will usually be collected in the nearest lymph nodes (which act like a sieve, I suppose) - this may be what has happened in your case. Or the nearest lymph nodes can't collect it all and the cancer cells are then travelling all around the body - this is N1 in a diagnostic report and the genie is out of the bottle, the whole lymphatic system cannot be treated curatively. Or the lymph nodes do their job well but the blood carries cancer cells around the body, including to the bone marrow where cells settle and then metastasise. Again, the genie is out of the bottle and generally speaking, although one or two bone mets can be zapped, there is a high chance that the cancer cells are already settled in bone marrow elsewhere around the body.

What is interesting is that for most men with PCa, the prostate cancer cells travel around the blood or lymphatic system but are never able to take hold / metastasise. I think PCUK was funding some research at one point to try to identify why some bodies can clean up the travelling cells and some can't.

I don't suppose there is any way for you or the surgeon to know whether those cells had all been caught in the sieve of the nearest lymph node (in which case, he should have a lovely undetectable PSA for the rest of his life) or whether the cancer was already settling in other nodes around his body. It is a waiting game and, if you are lucky, it will be a very long wait - my dad had his recurrence 13 years post-op although obviously those tiny micromets had been sitting there all that time. 

Edited by member 22 Jan 2022 at 15:54  | Reason: Not specified

"Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards." Soren Kierkegaard

User
Posted 22 Jan 2022 at 16:21

Thank you so so much Lyn. Such a detailed explanation and makes so much more sense to me now. Gives me hope too that it could be first scenario, but staying realistic and know more treatment may be needed. Will probably be later in the year before the HT is out of the system so should know more then x

User
Posted 23 Jan 2022 at 00:40

Lyn, can I ask you a question that arises out of your post on page 1 here?

After finishing RT it's very common to have to follow up with up to 3 years of HT. Of course there's psa tests along the way to check for increases plus whether the original treatment appears to have eliminated the cancer or not but if the psa is low or "undetectable" during the HT, I'm wondering what is the purpose of keeping it going. The ADT drugs aren't intended to get rid of cancer, so if they're simply keeping any remnant cancer cells dormant, so what?

I think their might be conflicting professional views here and it could be that extended HT with ultra low psa is simply playing it on the safe side [it would certainly increase 5 year survival rates in an AS way], or there might be some chance that over the extended period of HT there's a chance that some remnant cancer cells might die of boredom, which would make it worthwhile.

Maybe this is unanswerable but given those of us on HT can have several years to contemplate the existential point of extended HT I reckon it's worth discussion.

 

Jules

 

User
Posted 23 Jan 2022 at 02:41
When I first joined this forum, 3 months HT prior to RT and 12 months after was the norm. Then a big piece of breast cancer research data showed that the longer a woman is on HT the better - it was found that once she stops taking HT, the risk of recurrence is exactly the same as if she hadn't had the hormones at all. Suddenly, men on here were all being put on 3 years HT on the basis that it improved the chance of the RT being curative.

From memory, I think it was the RADICALS team that then got involved and concluded that 3 years provides no benefit over 18 months and comes with 18 months more side effects and associated drop in quality of life, so we now see far more men doing 3 months HT prior to RT and 15 or 18 months post-RT. The current RADICALS trial is comparing 6 months HT with 2 years - it will be interesting to see what conclusion they come to.

"Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards." Soren Kierkegaard

User
Posted 23 Jan 2022 at 02:44
Just to say, I think a similar trend is showing in breast cancer cases as well. I know a couple of women who were supposed to be on HT for 10 years but their oncos have changed their minds and stopped it after 2-3 years.
"Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards." Soren Kierkegaard

User
Posted 23 Jan 2022 at 03:05

Thanks Lyn. Yes, I guess it does come down to stats and that takes time to gather, like 10 years for a 10 year survival rate but the QOL issues are significant. It sounds, from what you're saying, that taking it out to 10 years for breast cancer made no difference to the chances of recurrence but simply put things on hold. That also sounds like it could mean an extra 10 years of life for those who would have a recurrence but 10 years difficult and unnecessary years of HT for those who wouldn't have a recurrence. I don't know how tolerable the HT for women with breast cancer might be but 10 years is a hell of a long time.

Even with PCa, HT the time adds up. A few months of HT before RT, plus 3 years of HT, plus another ~10-12 months of time to re-start testosterone production and it's getting close to 5 years of a treatment that can cause bone density problems, heart problems, diminished physical ability [apart from Irun πŸ˜€], QOL probs. and possibly contribute to a shorter lifespan.

I will be pushing my oncologist for an 18 month span and failing that, making a personal choice to drop it at 2 years.

Jules 

Edited by member 23 Jan 2022 at 03:53  | Reason: Not specified

User
Posted 23 Jan 2022 at 12:39
There are many HTs for breast cancer but the most common is Tamoxifen; women may also have Prostap or Zoladex so pretty much the same side effects that men have.
"Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards." Soren Kierkegaard

 
Forum Jump  
<123
©2025 Prostate Cancer UK