1. < Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer treatment delay.

Posted by kenporter @kenporter, Oct 25 12:22am

It’s been almost 6 months since I was diagnosed with a prostate cancer. Gleason 7 (4-3). With seminal vesicle invasion. Meeting radiation oncologists in 2 weeks. Just wondering if this 6 months of waiting could have advanced my cancer. It took 16 weeks for my health insurance to agree to pay for the PSMA PET scan.

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

cmkeeley | @cmkeeley | Oct 29 11:45am

Took me some time to get going through the system. Was about 6 months before I could get into a urologist. My thinking was "apparently it's not aggressive, if aggressive at all". Gleason of 4+3. Dr. knew my situation so the wait did not bother me. I actually felt better than having them say come in immediately.
Best of luck to you, hoping all goes well.

REPLY
trusam1 | @trusam1 | Oct 29 12:20pm
In reply to @pdcar4756 "give a look and listen to this talk by Dr. Mack Roach. Toward the end of..." + (show)
@pdcar4756

give a look and listen to this talk by Dr. Mack Roach. Toward the end of his talk he addresses the effect of delay in treatment of 6-9 months. He says there is no impact. https://pcri.org/2024-conference#2024ourspeakers

Jump to this post

FWIW, that talk starts at 3 hour 19 minute mark. I skimmed it, but could not find the comments on effect of delay in treatment.

I myself purposely delayed my treatment by 5-6 months because I wanted to complete something which I'd been heavily involved in for 20 years. I've wondered what effect that delay will have long-term. Logically, delaying 6 months must have *some* effect. One cannot continually delay and expect the cancer to not progress. Dr. roach must have been talking about significant statistical differences in a population. But for each of us, we care not about statistics in a population, but "what's going to happen to ME?" Seems like, the sooner, the better to me.

REPLY
1 reply
pdcar4756 | @pdcar4756 | Oct 29 3:24pm
In reply to @trusam1 "FWIW, that talk starts at 3 hour 19 minute mark. I skimmed it, but could not..." + (show)
@trusam1

FWIW, that talk starts at 3 hour 19 minute mark. I skimmed it, but could not find the comments on effect of delay in treatment.

I myself purposely delayed my treatment by 5-6 months because I wanted to complete something which I'd been heavily involved in for 20 years. I've wondered what effect that delay will have long-term. Logically, delaying 6 months must have *some* effect. One cannot continually delay and expect the cancer to not progress. Dr. roach must have been talking about significant statistical differences in a population. But for each of us, we care not about statistics in a population, but "what's going to happen to ME?" Seems like, the sooner, the better to me.

Jump to this post

I may have the wrong speaker. It may have been the speaker before Dr. Roach. That was Dr. Klotz speaking about active surveillance. I know from listening to video presentations at pcri.org that delays of 6-9 months in treatment led to no negative outcomes. There seem to have been studies on this topic back in the day where there were a smaller set of highly skilled doctors treating prostate cancer patients. In order to get care from that class of doctor it often involved 6-9 month wait times. Of course it also depends on the grade group of the cancer patient, whether cribriform is present, etc. Early treatment has to lead to better outcomes. But it is important to factor these things in and if possible, take time in weighing the options for treatment. We balance quality of life with effective cure on this journey.

REPLY
View MoreView Less
Please sign in or register to post a reply.