1. < Prostate Cancer

Active Surveillance As A Choice?

Posted by desertfalcon1954 @desertfalcon1954, Mar 11, 2024

This is very good news. Most men with localised prostate cancer are likely to live for a long time, whether or not they receive invasive treatment and whether or not their disease has spread, so a quick decision for treatment is not necessary and could cause harm.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2023-03-13-study-shows-delaying-treatment-localised-prostate-cancer-does-not-increase-mortality

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

airborn | @airborn | Jun 16, 2024
In reply to @mn281 "I'm always skeptical about data like these when they indicate that around 75% of the men..." + (show)
@mn281

I'm always skeptical about data like these when they indicate that around 75% of the men on active surveillance had some type of treatment within the 15 year study period. Was it that treatment that influenced the success rate to a higher degree? Hard to tell when only "around 15%" of the men stayed on AS the whole time. I agree a quick decision is not always needed, but IMO a decision at some point is necessary.

Jump to this post

A decision regarding what? To decide to treat?
Even if the 3tMRI was stable with no changes, and PSA was stable?
In this case the decision should remain AS.

REPLY
airborn | @airborn | 1 day ago
In reply to @rex5789 "Active surveilance is GREAT!!! as long as you assume PSA etc will drop...otherwise, research your options..." + (show)
@rex5789

Active surveilance is GREAT!!! as long as you assume PSA etc will drop...otherwise, research your options and get treatment. Use an oncologist, not a urologist.

Jump to this post

Mayo Clinic stated that if PC is localized, then an oncologist is not warranted, they sent me a letter in writing stating this.

REPLY
tdgillett | @tdgillett | 21 hours ago

It's smart to consult with an oncologist in addition to the urologist. You'll probably learn something and more knowledge is (almost always) good. My oncologist consult looked at other factors in my situation, i.e., size of my prostate (XL), small # of cancerous samples (2 of 23), proximity of prostate to my bladder, etc. Various RTs would be problematic for me due to size/density of prostate and mostly unknown locations of cancer. So AS was confirmed for now, but making checks (PSA, possible biopsy) more frequent. I just hit 79 and am in good health otherwise, pretty active. Also, my urologist referred me to the RO and they have a good, collaborative relationship.

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