Connect
Comment receiving replies
It doesn’t look too bad actually. Must’ve meant they have referred to things that I have never seen referred to this way before giving percentages versus saying you do or you do not have something.
The way this is phrased is confusing. Does a 10% pattern refer to 10% pattern 4. Normally, they would tell you what percent is a four the rest is a three. I would ask for clarification on this.
Lesion 3+4 10% pattern & 45% involved area
Percentages for these items are quite confusing. Normally, they say you have it or you don’t. Was 23% Extraprostatic extensions Meaning that you have them or that there is a percentage chance you have them. 74% Oregon confined does that mean it’s not completely confined or is it a 74% chance that it is completely confined?
Are they getting out that you need a prostatectomy in order to figure out what the real numbers are
Lymph 1%
Seminal vesicle 2%
Extraprostatic Ext 23%
Organ confined 74%
I would want to ask the doctor for an explanation of this information.
It is possible you could go on actress surveillance. Here is a video from a doctor that talks about it for people that have intermediate diagnosis Like you have.
Excellent Fred Hutch doctor video: Dr. Claire de la Calle
Active Surveillance for Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer w/ Dr. Claire de la Calle | Ep. 288
Replies to "It doesn’t look too bad actually. Must’ve meant they have referred to things that I have..."
Connect
@jeffmarc
Thanks for your input and video link
Those are great question
I do know the 10% pattern relates to the 4 on my 3+4 Gleason and the 35-45% refers to involved area which I assume indicates 35-45% of the biospy sample is a 4.
What seems weird is that result states "No tumor in the extraprostatic adipose tissue" but another section states EPE is 23%. Also that the "organ confined" at 74% seems to indicate how probable the cancer is contained which I assume means there"s a 26% chance it's NOT. Throw in the part that states NO Perineural Invasion makes this even more difficult to understand.
I don't really get the sense my Urologist gets too involved with these results and I'm basically here waiting to see if this Prolaris test comes back with anything.
It seems like the world of "intermediate risk" is not very clear and would love to find somebody that could offer an unbiased opinion on this.