← Return to Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) over diagnosis?

Discussion

Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) over diagnosis?

Prostate Cancer | Last Active: Dec 14, 2023 | Replies (32)

Comment receiving replies
@michaelcharles

Gentlemen: These are truly your choices and I respect them.
I had no problems with my transrectal biopsy.
My PSA was 3.9 in 2018 at age 68; 4.6 in 2020 at age 70 (some literature said age 70 normal PSA was less than 6); 5.9 in 2021 (retaken 3mos later 5.7).
Reluctantly (because I did not want to overreact) saw a Urologist in Dec 2021, who scheduled MRI for April 2022 and follow up for June 2022. No apparent urgency.
MRI identified PRads 4 & 3.
Fusion guided 18 core biopsy July 2022 found Gleason 8s and one 9.
Surgery August 2022. All clear postop, BUT extraprostatic extension (EPE) found outside prostate capsule, but within surgical boundaries.
Failed 1st postop PSA @ .19 ( repeated 30 days @ .18).
Now 1 year later, I have completed 2 mos of IMRT to the pelvic floor and pelvic lymph nodes, within a 4 mos course of ADT, and just received 1st post tx PSA < .02 (undetectable).
And I am very grateful for that uPSA result and all of my diagnoses and care.
However, I have some remorse about whether or not I could have, or should have, acted sooner vs not wanting to get caught in the Gerbil wheel of worrisome inconclusive diagnostic tests.
So, I get it and am only sharing my actual experience.
And I am not sure that I have ever seen a definitive medical statement that Gleason 3 + 3 never evolves to higher, more aggressive Gleason scores.
I only wish you and all the best, and that you never have to experience any progression or concern.
From my 2 yr journey, the only thing that is clear to me, is that nothing about this insidious disease is clear.

Jump to this post


Replies to "Gentlemen: These are truly your choices and I respect them. I had no problems with my..."

Thanks for a thoughtful and detailed description of your experience!

PCa is a disease that is best understood to be a sliding scale of severity for the majority of older men.

This is due to the history of how it was originally defined and treated and what is now understood, in 2023, by specialists on the cutting edge of the field today.

My comment that 3+3 Gleason NEVER metastasizes is based on the latest work of Dr. Matt Cooperberg and his colleagues (there are others).

In fact, there is a serious debate to rename Gleason 6, see the following website to read both sides of the debate:
https://www.urotoday.com/conference-highlights/aua-2023/aua-2023-prostate-cancer/144054-aua-2023-debate-renaming-gleason-6-prostate-cancer.html
Excerpt below:

“On that note, Dr. Cooperberg took over and titled his talk “Its Time to Rename Gleason 6.”

Cancer (from the Latin) implies insidious growth and spread – and nomenclature matters.

In a recent paper and call to action by him and colleagues (Eggener et al. JCO 2022), they make the following key points:

- Gleason 6 is extremely prevalent. Diagnosis is often incidental to BPH and other factors related to BPH (ie elevated PSA, urology visits)

- Gleason 6 never metastasizes

- Gleason 6 has few, if any, molecular hallmarks of cancer

- AS is still done highly inconsistently

- “Gleason 6” as a non-cancer would still require surveillance

- The harm: benefit ratio of screening is improved the less we overdiagnose low-grade disease”

At the end of the day, every man facing the vagaries of PCa, needs to be satisfied (and hopefully thankful) for whatever plan or treatment they decide upon with their doctor(s).