Can Prostate Cancer "Take a New Trajectory"?
Hello, forum friends. I know y'all are not doctors but I've been on this forum long enough to appreciate your knowledge gained from your experiences.
I was diagnosed in Nov 2021. Stage 4a, Gleason 9, Decipher .99
I had surgery in Jan 2022. Cancer confined to prostate, seminal vesicles, and 1 of 12 pelvic lymph nodes. After surgery, I think my PSA was .02, not sure.
I don't remember exactly when, but I had a follow up PMSA scan at some time within the following year. There was a very small spot that showed up on my hip but it was never confirmed if this was cancer or not . I believe my PSA was .1
I started ADT (Orgovyx) in Jan 2023 and 3 months later started radiation of the pelvic area. I completed radiation in May 2023. After radiation, my PSA was < 0.01. I was on Orgovyx for 2 1/2 years and just came off last month (I didn't want to but my Drs wanted me to. I dont know why).
Since radiation and as long as I've been on Orgovyx, my PSA has remained at < 0.01 (for over 2 years). Praise God.
My question is this-- with Gleason 9 and Decipher .99, I've been told from day 1 that my cancer is aggressive. That's why I'm scared to now be off the ADT. Can treatments, if successful, change the "trajectory" of the cancer-- yes, it was G9 with .99 Decipher but I've gone through all these treatments now and maybe the cancer is gone? So, does it still matter what it was/used to be?
I've got labs and appt coming up next month-- 2 months since stopped Orgovyx. We'll see what the PSA is.
Interested in more discussions like this? Go to the Prostate Cancer Support Group.
Ok. I'm the original starter of this thread. Let me follow-up--
After prostatectomy + radiation + ADT (orgovyx), I've been PSA < 0.01 for little over 2 years.
At my Drs recommendation, I came off ADT mid-July. I've got my first labs coming up mid September.
If PSA starts to rise, this is called a biochemical recurrence (BCR)? At what point do we start thinking that cancer has reoccurred? When is a followup PET scan done?
So, I've been < 0.01. When it's determined that I need to get back on treatments?
My cancer was stage 4a, Gleason 9, Decipher .99. So, from the start my Drs have always said the cancer is aggressive and we are going to be aggressive in treatment. So, I'm completely dumbfounded what's to be gained by taking me off ADT! It just seems to be taking a risk that is completely unnecessary!
My PSA has been < 0.01--- why screw this up?
I forgot to mention, a PSMA scan a while back (over a year ago) picked up a small lung nodule. I've had 2 followup CT scans since and the nodule has not increased in size. I'm now kinda worried that with me going off ADT, if it's metastatic cancer that it may start to grow!!
Icorps, Thanks for the ‘AI take’ on that. After reading the explanation maybe Sam Altman is right and it’s just a bubble and not the next greatest thing?🫣 It almost seems like we didn’t need billions of dollars worth of GPU’s to understand that longer PSA doubling times usually indicate less aggressive cancers, right?
Hopefully, future models will be a little better than this! Thanks again,
Phil
Phil
That approach is why Im in this clinical trial at NIH (NCT05588128) w Dr Ravi Madan. He's looking for volunteers.
Might want to help get the word around.
NIH covers travel expenses of us "lab rats". Plus it's first rate detection and follow up w all results sent to your attending docs who remain the lead dogs on the sled.
Dr. Ravi Madan is leading a clinical trial to determine the natural history of prostate cancer recurrence in patients with very low PSA levels that are detectable with sensitive PSMA scans. The core question of the trial, and the answer to your query, is: Just because a sensitive PSMA scan can now detect recurrence at very low PSA levels, does that mean we should immediately treat it? The current consensus is often no, and the study aims to definitively answer this question.
The clinical trial and its implications
Study design: Dr. Madan's trial (NCT05588128), conducted at the National Cancer Institute, monitors patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (a rising PSA after initial treatment) using repeated PSMA PET imaging, along with regular PSA tests and biomarker collection.
Understanding the disease's "natural history": The primary purpose is to follow patients without immediate intervention to see how the disease progresses over time. PSMA scans can show tiny spots of cancer earlier than ever before, but it's not known if these micrometastases represent an immediate threat to the patient's health.
Challenging the impulse to treat: Previously, conventional imaging like CT and bone scans were far less sensitive, so visible recurrence was treated. Now, very sensitive PSMA scans can create anxiety by revealing tiny spots of cancer that may be clinically insignificant and progress very slowly. The trial questions whether this finding necessitates immediate, aggressive therapy.
Early findings: Preliminary results presented at ASCO 2024 showed that of 86 patients monitored, 76 had PSMA-positive findings, but only one progressed in the short term, with 85% receiving no treatment. This early data suggests that many patients with PSMA-detected recurrence can be safely monitored without rushing to therapy.
Preserving quality of life: A major goal of this research is to delay the need for systemic treatments like Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT), which can cause significant side effects and reduce quality of life. The trial seeks to find low-toxicity alternatives or determine that surveillance is the better option for some patients.
PSA doubling time remains important: The study reinforces that PSA kinetics—specifically, the rate at which PSA levels are rising (PSA doubling time)—are still a crucial indicator for risk stratification and may be more important than a single positive PSMA scan.
Conclusion: A change in approach is likely needed
The research by Dr. Madan and others suggests that simply seeing a spot of cancer on a PSMA scan at very low PSA levels does not automatically mean treatment is necessary. The high sensitivity of PSMA imaging requires a new understanding of what "recurrence" means in this context. The findings from this trial will help develop new, evidence-based guidelines for managing patients with PSMA-detected recurrence, potentially allowing for active surveillance in certain cases and avoiding or delaying unnecessary toxicity from treatment.
Is their PSMA Pet test different than the normal one. The normal PSMA Pet test cannot detect micro metastasis. Smallest metastasis they can see is 2.7 mm and the RO at UCSF Said during a recent seminar that even at 5 mm it is hard to see metz.
Jeff
Their PSMA test is the Pylairfly test. Their kind of wizz bang in doing them too.
You take it at 9:00am and at 3:00 pm you're in Dr Madan's office discussing the results after an image expert has reviewed them and opined on them. My main doc outfit is at Georgetown U Medstar. And as efficient as they are they aren't that quick.
But as to yout major point on detection, I'm sure Madan understands this and has a system of seeing whether the remaining cancer is "PSMA stable" etc.
That PSMA PET is still not "all seeing" is why my guy at Georgetown Dr. Sean P. Collins used a nearby field radiotherapy zapping system even w SBRT where he'd zap nearby nodes that weren't glowing
He's now at U of Southern Fla.
Well, icorps, it certainly seems like a study worth doing; overtreatment is nobody’s idea of fun, right? And of course, thank you for your service to our cause!
In another discussion (last week maybe?) it was mentioned that before PSMA, bone scans were the gold standard for retreatment; if it’s not in the bones you’re OK. We can all see the shortcomings in that line of reasoning, but it mostly worked…
I’ve long felt that PSA doubling time/velocity is the real measure of aggressiveness and I hope the study - of which you are a part - validates this beyond a doubt.
But I can think of the men with very aggressive cancers whose cells do not produce much PSA really throwing a wrench into the hypothesis.
What do you tell a patient who has multiple metastases to the ribcage discovered on a chest Xray during a yearly physical? Yikes! Again, so many damned exceptions…Best,
Phil
Great study! Thanks, some real food for thought. It may have implications beyond that in terms of what is treated. What Gleason scores did the patients have?
@icorps, I see that you are taking advantage of using AI to seek information. I thought you might appreciate this guidance about posting AI responses on Mayo Clinic Connect and how to do so responsibly and within the guidelines.
- What is Generative AI? What does this mean on Mayo Clinic Connect? https://connect.mayoclinic.org/blog/about-connect/newsfeed-post/what-is-generative-ai-artificial-intelligence-what-does-this-mean-on-mayo-clinic-connect/
Phil
You're so right.
Hence the hallmark definition of the disease-
"Heterogeneity "
Jim