I am sorry, I don’t mean to be cutting but like everyone else on here, have to remember that the way something is written is not the way it might be read by others and that, of course, is sometimes harder for me than for most. It applies to you as well though - I don’t believe others will understand it in the way you intended, partly because you have muddled up the positive and negative margins thing.
I have copied here the reply you gave Andy last year - you seem to have had a complete turnaround?
Posted 03 Jul 2018 at 17:51
Hi it would help if you could update your profile with dates and PSA readings and your final pathology report. It is also essential you confirm there was no lymph node or seminal vesicle involvement as this ups the anti in favour of early radiation.
Assuming your cancer was the "common one" and your PSA is only 0.03 2 and a half years later whatever you have is incredibly slow growing so even if you never saw another doctor again there is a good chance you would die from something else.
This nomogram may help you consider the risk associated with waiting until 0.1
I ran your stats as I know them and waiting until 0.1 rather than 0.03 made 1% difference on the outcomes at 5 and 10 years.
The bad news is while prostatectomy has a 20 to 30 percent failure rate salvage radiation is 50/50 so you probably want to avoid it if you can..
Fingers crossed your PSA will gave gone down like mine did after it hit 0.03 !!!
Edited by member 14 Jan 2019 at 21:56
| Reason: Not specified