I would worry that some people would rush to treatment instead of understanding what a low level increase means to them.
This story deals with a specific catagory of men who have increases in a specific area of their prostate cancer. These are knowledgeable and well informed men who have a very good understanding of what this 'inceases' means to them. These are men who have thought far enough ahead to have developed a "Plan B" if certain tests for Prostate Cancer changes in a particular way.
I respect and appreciate these men who have studied their disease well enough, and have discussed with their doctors just what they would do if some of their test scores would change
Thanks, Joe. I see your points. Ever vigilant. I came thisclose to surgery 11 years ago The urologist said he had good news and bad news. The bad news was that I had cancer. (He didn't say low-risk.) The good news, according to him, was that he had an opening in his OR the next week. I got a second opinion the next day. I've been on AS ever since. I think the secret is to get a second or even a third opinion.
Thank you for always bringing us late-breaking medical news, Howard. It's very important for men to receive reliable information in order to make such a critical decision. It's difficult to keep up with all the current studies without help from writers like you. Many thanks!
Note the researcher's comment: "....about 50% did not have genomic testing...". I was fortunate to have two, early genomic testings at UCSF which affirmed the MRI and biopsy results. Let there be light on genomic testing and better imaging diagnostics. Thank you.
Great article. Anything AS has my attention. I thought the study was important but a little vague on details. Specifically, how many of the participants were grade 2, three, four, and five?
A well written and current story.
I would worry that some people would rush to treatment instead of understanding what a low level increase means to them.
This story deals with a specific catagory of men who have increases in a specific area of their prostate cancer. These are knowledgeable and well informed men who have a very good understanding of what this 'inceases' means to them. These are men who have thought far enough ahead to have developed a "Plan B" if certain tests for Prostate Cancer changes in a particular way.
I respect and appreciate these men who have studied their disease well enough, and have discussed with their doctors just what they would do if some of their test scores would change
in a particular way. kapm
Kap, Thoughtful analysis. I was surprised that some of men remained on AS for so long. The Active Surveillor.
Surgery is never the answer
The side affects are much worse than the disease could ever be
Gleason 6 does not have the true characteristics of a true cancer and does not progress.
This is the most over treated disease in the medical industry
Be careful, lots of urologist are in this game to make a buck and do not have your best interest in mind
I know numerous men that went thru with surgery and are now leaking and limp with many regrets
Knowledge is power- educate and then make decisions. Don’t base decisions off doctor’s recommendations
Thanks, Joe. I see your points. Ever vigilant. I came thisclose to surgery 11 years ago The urologist said he had good news and bad news. The bad news was that I had cancer. (He didn't say low-risk.) The good news, according to him, was that he had an opening in his OR the next week. I got a second opinion the next day. I've been on AS ever since. I think the secret is to get a second or even a third opinion.
Another interesting study that many may not have known about. Thank you for bringing this to our attention, Howard.
Thanks, Jeff. That's why The Active Surveillor is here. Some of the news that fits.
Thank you for always bringing us late-breaking medical news, Howard. It's very important for men to receive reliable information in order to make such a critical decision. It's difficult to keep up with all the current studies without help from writers like you. Many thanks!
Thanks, Nancy. Always have my eyes open for breaking news we can use. The Active Surveillor.
Note the researcher's comment: "....about 50% did not have genomic testing...". I was fortunate to have two, early genomic testings at UCSF which affirmed the MRI and biopsy results. Let there be light on genomic testing and better imaging diagnostics. Thank you.
Good points Geoff. I asked the researchers for more info on genomic testing and marker testing. We'll see what they say. The Active Surveillor.
Peter Carroll, MD, responded.: will look in more detail, but most were GG 2, GS 3/4 at progression
Peter R Carroll, MD, MPH
Ken and Donna Derr - Chevron Distinguished Professor
Taube Family Distinguished Professor
Department of Urology
University of California, San Francisco
More questions pending.
Great article. Anything AS has my attention. I thought the study was important but a little vague on details. Specifically, how many of the participants were grade 2, three, four, and five?
I agree. Maybe the researchers will tell us. Thanks for joining The Active Surveillor.