Prostate Cancer

[rudebhoy]

After reading about Steve Ryder, I phoned up the doctors yesterday and told them I'd like a PSA test.

The receptionist told me they would send me a letter outlining the pros and cons. I told her I'd done my research, knew I had a raised risk (over 60, and have to get up to pee during the night), but she insisted I had to read the letter first.

Got the letter today, it's like they are trying to put people off, here's a few quotes:

The PSA test finds many cancers which would not cause any health problems if untreated. Having the test may cause unnecessary worry as well as unnecessary investigations and treatment. Not having a test will mean you don't have unnecessary worry, investigations or treatment.

Prostate cancer is diagnosed on average between 6 and 8 years earlier in men who have the test than those who don't have the test. It is not known whether early diagnosis and treatment makes any difference to how long you are likely to live if you have prostate cancer.

About 70 men in every 100 with a raised PSA result do not have prostate cancer.

Around 15 in every 100 men who have a normal PSA result do have prostate cancer.


I'm quite shocked by the tone of the letter which is basically saying the PSA test is very unreliable and not worth having. i thought it was a no-brainer to have one if you have a raised risk?

 

[ColchesterFC]

I think @Ethan is your man for information on this. I'm sure he's posted about the PSA test before. I might be wrong, and apologies to Ethan if I am, but I got the impression from his posts that he wasn't in favour of them.

 

[ColchesterFC]

Some of his posts about it in this thread.....

Golf Monthly Prostate Cancer UK The Big Race - Donate To The Team!

This Saturday, 2nd April 'The Barry Kilby Prostate Cancer Appeal' is hosting a Prostate testing awareness session at Nelson Golf Club. BKPCA regularly hosts these sessions around the Burnley area and if it weren't for the generosity of Barry in contributing towards the cost of the testing a...

forums.golfmonthly.com

 

[Lord Tyrion]

It's all very confusing isn't it? Not good when that happens.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

I have always got the impression that prostate cancer was almost dismissed but breat cancer the important one. I wonder why that might be?

 

[TimShady]

I have always got the impression that prostate cancer was almost dismissed but breat cancer the important one. I wonder why that might be?

Because breast cancer is often a death sentence and prostate cancer has relatively little impact on a large number of sufferers.

Ideally everyone with every type of cancer would receive treatment immediately but where resources have to be managed, that’s not really possible.

 

[Billysboots]

As someone who has been treated for prostate cancer, I do get slightly angry when I hear of GP’s trying to dissuade men from having a PSA test.

I’ll say at the outset I am very aware that the test is not desperately accurate, but I’ll balance that by saying it is a guide. A starting point only. No decision will ever be made regarding treatment based on a PSA test. But what it does do, when combined with a physical examination, is provide the first clue to a GP that there may be an issue which requires further investigation via the expedited cancer pathway.

It is only after a follow up MRI, and biopsy, that a urologist will have a better idea of what is going on, and based on staging will recommend options to a patient. Those options will include, but are not limited to, active surveillance (periodic PSA tests), surgery and radiotherapy. It is the patient’s decision which route they go down, and it is therefore for the patient to gather as much information as possible, from as many sources as possible, before deciding what is best for them. No two men are the same, and as such choices will vary.

In my case, the indication was my cancer was confined to my prostate, and was graded intermediate in terms of risk (Gleason 3+4 to those who have been there). I was aged 54 and otherwise fit and well, with no typical symptoms.

I decided I wanted rid. I had lost my father to cancer when he was in his 30’s, and I could not live with the thought of a cancer growing inside me. I was very aware of the side effects of surgery - they can be vicious, to put it mildly. But despite being offered active surveillance I accepted the risks and opted for surgery.

Be aware that it is only after surgery, once full histology is completed, that a urologist will know for sure what they are dealing with. Even a biopsy isn’t 100% conclusive. My grading of 3+4 was accurate, but the tumour was within a fraction of a millimetre of breaching my prostate and starting to spread. I am two years post surgery and whilst my life has changed in so many ways, many of them unseen to those around me (my mental health has taken a battering), I have absolutely no regrets. Mine was the right decision.

But none of this would have happened without the very first step - the PSA test. So, whilst far from infallible, I’m all for men having them, especially if they are at enhanced risk. Don’t listen to GP’s who tell you, as I know some have, that men don’t develop prostate cancer in their 40’s. That’s absolute rubbish, and yet at least one of my friends was told that when he tried to book a test in response to my diagnosis.

My advice, and I accept alternative thoughts are out there, is that you have more to lose by not having a test than by having one.

 

[Robster59]

At the risk of being cynical, these kind of tests would come out of the GP's budget. And they may not consider it as money well spent given the above. I'm not saying this is right, just my thoughts.

 

[Billysboots]

Because breast cancer is often a death sentence and prostate cancer has relatively little impact on a large number of sufferers.

Ideally everyone with every type of cancer would receive treatment immediately but where resources have to be managed, that’s not really possible.

Cancer confined to the prostate will not kill you. But once it breaches the gland, it can be a very, very different story.

 

[Paperboy]

Because breast cancer is often a death sentence and prostate cancer has relatively little impact on a large number of sufferers.

Ideally everyone with every type of cancer would receive treatment immediately but where resources have to be managed, that’s not really possible.

I think this is incredibly naive. My Dad had prostrate cancer it was caught early and treated. Even with all this he was dead in under 18 months.
From where the treatment wasn't effective and had spread to his bones and other organs.

 

[TimShady]

I think this is incredibly naive. My Dad had prostrate cancer it was caught early and treated. Even with all this he was dead in under 18 months.
From where the treatment wasn't effective and had spread to his bones and other organs.

“Relatively” being my vital word that you didn’t quote.

I’m incredibly sorry for your loss but using individual cases doesn’t alter the statistics of cancer and how the limitations in finance will drive treatments.

 

[TimShady]

Cancer confined to the prostate will not kill you. But once it breaches the gland, it can be a very, very different story.

Yes, I am aware and it’s why I personally would advocate for a PSA test if someone feels that the knowledge would help them.

 

[Tashyboy]

Because breast cancer is often a death sentence and prostate cancer has relatively little impact on a large number of sufferers.

Ideally everyone with every type of cancer would receive treatment immediately but where resources have to be managed, that’s not really possible.

Prostate and breast cancer are both the second most common cancers in men and women respectively. Approximately 13 percent of women will develop breast cancer while about 12 percent of men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer.

in both cases early diagnosis helps reduce the impact and severity.

 

[Tashyboy]

Had a phone call on the course today. From the consultant that did the prostate biopsy’. He once more said “it’s all clear and now I have peace of mind”. I couldn’t of put it better.

 

[Tashyboy]

“Relatively” being my vital word that you didn’t quote.

I’m incredibly sorry for your loss but using individual cases doesn’t alter the statistics of cancer and how the limitations in finance will drive treatments.

For someone who has gone on record as saying it’s immaterial as it’s a view not a fact. His view is based on a fact.
Have you ever had any cancer scares.

 

[AmandaJR]

I have always got the impression that prostate cancer was almost dismissed but breat cancer the important one. I wonder why that might be?

What a weird post. Why do you think that might be?

 

[TimShady]

For someone who has gone on record as saying it’s immaterial as it’s a view not a fact. His view is based on a fact.
Have you ever had any cancer scares.

Again, someone using their own experience doesn’t change statistical clinical outcomes.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

What a weird post. Why do you think that might be?

Could it be that breasts are mainly a female item and more obvious to the eye?

 

[Tashyboy]

What a weird post. Why do you think that might be?

Talking to Missis T who mentioned re me and the prostate business. When it comes to hereditary cancer in families. The gene that is present in prostate cancers in some instances is present in breast cancer.

 

[Whereditgo]

Could it be that breasts are mainly a female item and more obvious to the eye?

Or more likely that it is more Metastatic and typically spreads to the brain.