Reality Check

[Guest guest]

Also interesting, using the MSKCC nomogram, I get 87%

probability of organ confined disease in the current model, but only 67%

probability in the historical model, probably where my urologist got the 67% he

reported to me.

Tom Lauterback

From:

ProstateCancerSupport

[mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of cpcohen1945

Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 9:43 AM

To: ProstateCancerSupport

Subject: Re: Reality Check

Tom --

I've just checked my numbers (PSA 8.0, Gleason 3+3, T1c) on this site from

s Hopkins:

http://urology.jhu.edu/prostate/partintables.php

which has " 2001 " Partin tables, and I get:

.. . . Organ confined: 81 (79-83)

.. . . Extraprostatic extension: 18 (16-19)

.. . . Seminal Vesicle Invasion: 1 (1-2)

.. . . Lymph Node Invasion: 0 (0-0)

So your 67% isn't bad. You might try the s Hopkins site, and see if their

numbers are different.

There's also a good set of nomograms on the MSKCC website:

http://www.mskcc.org/mskcc/html/10088.cfm

The catheter I had in, for three weeks after surgery, was certainly not a

friend. It hurt, and it gave me bladder spasms. And I suspect that it scarred

my urethra and made it close up, months later.

But the catheters that I insert every other day, to avoid another urinary

stricture, are definitely " on my side " .

As you say (in another post), it's important to deal with your current

situation. The most important thing I learned from my local support group is:

.. . . " I have prostate cancer " is _not_ the same as " I'm

dying " .

You have time to think and consider the options carefully.

Another uro's opinion would be worth having. Hardly any doctor will say:

.. . " _I_ did a bad job " ,

but some doctors are willing to say:

.. . " I would have done it differently "

and work on fixing the problem.

>

> :

>

> Good observations all. But I'm confused about the Partin. I was told that

> it's never higher than 80%, so I thought I was on pretty solid ground with

> 67%. Not so?

>

> The catheter, in my mind, is the enemy, especially after what I've been

> through.

>

> I just got off the phone with an old friend who went through brachytherapy

7

> years ago, actually the person who predisposed me to brachy. He pointed

out

> that I'm focused on the wrong problem, cancer vs. quality of life, and I

> wonder how many of us that applies to. We're scared to death of " The

Big C "

> and just want it out or gone at all costs, whereas we can go through a

> botched procedure like I've apparently gone through (TUMP) and still stay

> focused on the radiation/RP/whatever to cure the cancer and not the damage

> done by the botched procedure. I'm guilty of staying focused on the

ultimate

> step and unfocused on the fact that my quality of life is zero now and may

> not get any better. Time for a new urologist and/or oncologist.

>

>

>

> Crap shoot indeed. And the " house " seems to have a huge

advantage.

>

>

>

> Tom Lauterback

>

>

>