New treatment Pluvicto (radioligand therapy) for prostate cancer

Posted by mike72 @mike72, Jul 7 1:20pm

Interested in more discussions like this? Go to the Prostate Cancer Support Group.

@clandeboye1

I sympathise with your situation .
The clear message here is " DO NOT IGNORE YOUR REGULAR PSA RESULTS " . and educate yourself on the warning signs of cancer etc . I am amazed at the number of men who even refuse a simple Digtal Rectal Exam ( DRE ) to test your prostate .
Your early retention was likely the result of untreated BPH , which would have been found with the DRE .
Finally , anyone whose father had prostate cancer is at 5 - 6 times higher risk to also get prostate cancer .
This is a sad - preventable story .

Jump to this post

Clandeboy1, please don’t get me wrong. I have absolutely no regrets. I made those choices because of my young age. At 66 now, my course would probably be different. I had a relatively normal life for almost 14years post diagnosis.

REPLY
@proftom2

Good idea. Like this conversation. I am 3.7 years in on this journey and have complete labs done every three months. Every 6 months I visit with an Oncology Nutritionist, epically helpful. She's trained me to forget about the Diet do's and don't and focus on "Nutrition." Everyday fruit, veggies, lots of greens, nuts, couple cups of yogurt w/berries, little bit of bread/toast. Yes, on a burger once in a while. My nutrition is guided by quality over quantity, keep it fresh. If I were to write Advanced Prostate Cancer book chapter one would be titled "The Joy of Eating Well."

Jump to this post

Exactly! Our grandparents/great-grandparents had a rule-of-thumb to cover 1/2 of the plate with vegetables, 1/4 with a starch (like potatoes or rice) and 1/4 with a higher-protein source (like meat or beans). It's amazing how well that's held up over the past century, as over-hyped fad diets have come and gone.

Eating well isn't complicated until we make it complicated.

REPLY

I'm very moved by these narratives. In the depth of pain there is something else. Self-care, grit, yes courage, overcoming denial, steady-on, faith. They don't come in tablet form. I'm awaiting a biopsy for my prostate cancer in two weeks. It has moved me to tap into the spiritual strength on offer here and for which I'm grateful.

REPLY
@stevecando54

Although my story was probably preventable, I chose not to go for checkups. I only went if I had a problem that didn't go away. When my leg pain didn't go away, I finally went to find out why. Stage 4 metastatic prostate cancer. Before the pain I had no noticeable symptoms. I have no regrets about not going. I have even given thought about getting a primary care doctor, just haven't done it yet. I see my Oncologist once a month including blood work. Although fighting fatigue, I'm having a good time. Best to all.

Jump to this post

FROM MAYO
Myth: People who have cancer shouldn't eat sugar, since it can cause cancer to grow faster.
Fact: More research is needed to understand the relationship between sugar in the diet and cancer. All kinds of cells, including cancer cells, depend on blood sugar (glucose) for energy. But giving more sugar to cancer cells doesn't make them grow faster. Likewise, depriving cancer cells of sugar doesn't make them grow more slowly.

This misconception may be based in part on a misunderstanding of positron emission tomography (PET) scans, which use a small amount of radioactive tracer — typically a form of glucose. All tissues in your body absorb some of this tracer, but tissues that are using more energy — including cancer cells — absorb greater amounts. For this reason, some people have concluded that cancer cells grow faster on sugar. But this isn't true.

There is some evidence that consuming large amounts of sugar is associated with an increased risk of certain cancers, including esophageal cancer. Eating too much sugar can also lead to weight gain and increase the risk of obesity and diabetes, which may increase the risk of cancer.

REPLY
@melcanada

FROM MAYO
Myth: People who have cancer shouldn't eat sugar, since it can cause cancer to grow faster.
Fact: More research is needed to understand the relationship between sugar in the diet and cancer. All kinds of cells, including cancer cells, depend on blood sugar (glucose) for energy. But giving more sugar to cancer cells doesn't make them grow faster. Likewise, depriving cancer cells of sugar doesn't make them grow more slowly.

This misconception may be based in part on a misunderstanding of positron emission tomography (PET) scans, which use a small amount of radioactive tracer — typically a form of glucose. All tissues in your body absorb some of this tracer, but tissues that are using more energy — including cancer cells — absorb greater amounts. For this reason, some people have concluded that cancer cells grow faster on sugar. But this isn't true.

There is some evidence that consuming large amounts of sugar is associated with an increased risk of certain cancers, including esophageal cancer. Eating too much sugar can also lead to weight gain and increase the risk of obesity and diabetes, which may increase the risk of cancer.

Jump to this post

"This misconception may be based in part on a misunderstanding of positron emission tomography (PET) scans, which use a small amount of radioactive tracer — typically a form of glucose. All tissues in your body absorb some of this tracer, but tissues that are using more energy — including cancer cells — absorb greater amounts. For this reason, some people have concluded that cancer cells grow faster on sugar. But this isn't true."

Ah yes, the Dunning-Kruger effect at work: the less I know about a topic, the more confident I am drawing broad conclusions. I kid myself that I can tell the Bank of Canada *exactly* how it should manage the Canadian economy, but ask me about the field where I actually spent 6 years doing my Ph.D. research (nothing to do with to economics), and you'll hear a lot of "maybe", "probably", and "it depends on the context." 🙂

REPLY
Please sign in or register to post a reply.