Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Treatment debate’ Category

URO TODAY: You’re a “low risk” prostate cancer patient – what treatment do you choose?

A panel of three doctors – expert in active surveillance, surgery and radio therapy – look at a 62-year-old with Gleason 6, 2/12 positive biopsy samples, small volume, PSA 0.09 and good sexual function. READ MORE>

Read Full Post »

NEW PROSTATE CANCER INFO-LINK: Surgery was the preferred prostate cancer treatment option for three out of five men surveyed at three US urology clinics. READ MORE>

Read Full Post »

NEW PROSTATE CANCER INFOLINK: A trial to see whether double hormone therapy for prostate cancer is better than using a single androgen blockade is not expected to report until 2013, so meantime “you are going to have to rely on your own research and a discussion with your doctor”. READ MORE>

Read Full Post »

NEW PROSTATE CANCER INFOLINK: Evidence is growing that active surveillance – watchful waiting – is a viable option for men diagnosed with prostate cancer, but more long-term data is needed on survival rates. READ MORE>

“…these data – indicating that just 51 (11%) of 470 men in the Johns Hopkins active surveillance series have gone on to have a radical prostatectomy within roughly a 3-year follow-up period – continue to offer strong evidence of the potential of this management technique.

Read Full Post »

NEW PROSTATE CANCER INFOLINK: It is time for us to take a step back and look at the whole issue of cancer screening with unblinkered eyes, writes Mike Scott of the American Cancer Society’s announcement it will review its policy on cancer screening. READ MORE>

The “New” Prostate Cancer InfoLink expects to receive a lot of “flak” about this particular commentary, but we are adamant about the need for a whole new attitude to cancer screening — an attitude that is based fundamentally on the very best interests of the patient with clinically significant cancer that needs to be found and on the very best interests of consumers in whom it may well be possible to identify cancer cells but who need to know that this form of cancer is of little clinical relevance to their lives.

Read Full Post »

NEW PROSTATE CANCER INFOLINK: Are we overdoing cancer awareness campaigns to the point of scaring young people into getting tests, or alternatively driving them towards unnecessary treatment? READ MORE>

Mike Scott writes:

The last thing that we need to do is make boys and young men scared of prostate cancer.

Scared men will avoid the tests they may need to manage their personal risk or may come to insist (even more than the current generation) on unnecessary and aggressive treatments for low-risk and indolent disease!

A scared man is not an “aware” man. He is someone who has been misled about his real clinical risk.

Read Full Post »

URO TODAY: Not all patients with a biopsy prostate cancer Gleason score of  6 (< /=3 + 3) – usually considered safe – have low-risk disease, according to new German research. READ MORE>

High-risk Gleason score < /=3 + 3 patients have a similar risk profile as more favourable GS 3 + 4 patients. This finding warrants consideration when deciding on treatment.

Read Full Post »

URO TODAY: Testing for prostate cancer Gene 3 in urine from men under active surveillance is not on its own a useful predictor of disease progression. READ MORE>

Read Full Post »

URO TODAY: What do you do when the pathologist reports “positive margins” after a radical prostatectomy? One of the world’s leading prostate cancer experts is studying the effects of post RRP treatment with radiotherapy in such cases. READ MORE>

Read Full Post »

URO TODAY: Is leaving apparently low-grade prostate cancer alone and waiting to see what happens really a viable option? We can’t be sure until more research is done, says the “father” of PSA testing, Professor William Catalona. READ MORE>

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »