case of the mysterious shrinking prostate

Estimate-within what tolerance levels?1%?10% 25%? I appreciate it's not exact-but if the difference can be as much as half/double the size-why even bother giving the numbers?and surely,a rapidly growing prostate would account for higher PSA levels-so size relevant? I do not understand how the SIZE of suspicious area is based on data from biopsy cores??since there was only 7% involvement,deemed gleason 3+3, within ONE of the tiny shreds of tissue that were removed,therefore the size is determined by??? subsequent MRI showed several suspicious areas,some of them 2mm or more,which,as you rightly say, are unknown quantities as far as knowing for certain whether cancerous or not/likely to spread or not-yet to us far from irrelevant,as,if seen to be enlarging on subsequent MRI's-(surely,the whole point of more MRI's is to track potential change/enlargement???)they might merit further investigation..

Assessing how big the cancerous area is, based on biopsy cores is more difficult if there is only one core. But how far down the core it is and what the cores immediately around it showed are both long standing methods of estimating how much of the prostate is affected.

PSA production isn't necessarily directly proportional to the size (or growth rate) of the prostate. PSA may be a more reliable indicator of how active the cancer is, in which case a rise from 8-12 to 15 suggests not much is changing

Interesting reply Lyn..so,asking repeatedly (and politely) for explanations,as well as stating that I feel puzzled,cannot understand something,and things are new to me is being angry?I appreciate your trying to be helpful by getting back to me-even though it was not with an answer to my original question..'ask your doctors,I'm sure they will explain it'-not helpful ...

And the article documenting sheer variety in prostate enlargement/shrinkage with advancing age-just comes to show..so much neither we nor them know for certain!

Thank you-yes,I think I understand a lot of what you say..social media can be a very convenient way of sharing information,yet can also be a minefield-tone and emotion lost,or open to misinterpretation-..add to that my limited computer ability (I finding it a bit challenging to negotiate the website easily,not sure whether I'm even posting in the most apt section..) and the fact that I've spent a lot of my life trying to 'tone down' in order to fit in or be able to have normalish conversations (as I said,often I don't get people,their expressions,style of communicating or intentions-and yes,aspergers spectrum)-and not always managing it..does that make me angry?maybe ,at times,certainly very frustrated..the 'pecking order' bit (which was not helpful to the conversation,was merely intended to put a frame around past experience on here) stemmed from that-there was a thread, previously,which unnecessarily turned rather personal and a bit vicious-as far as I could tell none of the posters new to the site like myself..unnecessary,not helpful,several  posts ended up edited by moderators-(on one post I was told that people on the whole really did not care or weren't that interested in what I was trying to find answers to)..My guess is hence Lyn's reference to 'I forget how angry you can be'? On balance,,I also had some very kind and helpful replies,which encouraged me to post again..As always,people are free to scroll past if not relevant to them-I do not expect nor ask anybody to supply easy answers,nor blame them for posting stuff that is irrelevant to our own situation whilst attempting to be helpful,nor do I want to disrespect anybody whilst sometimes-as respectfully as I am able to-pointing out that my experience differs to theirs.

Please see my previous comment- NOT expecting definitive answers,merely hoping to get the benefit of pooled knowledge and experience,as well as happy to share mine with anybody who might be interested..I was told by PCUK specialist nurse earlier that the questions I have are most certainly worth asking-as is getting a second or third opinion..cancer is a very individual thing,no two cases ever exactly the same..Somebody else said awhile ago that the only stupid question is the one you did not think to/take the opportunity to ask..

Gleason grades can be insufficient  indicators of both agressiveness and spread ,especially if a TRUS biopsy was done,(rather than an mpMRI first,as recommended by PCUK.)which at best only samples 3% of entire prostate.On top of that it is very much down to whoever looks at the slides to decide which grade to assign-human error and subjectivity come in to the picture..Have repeatedly spoken with people who's gleason was upgraded following surgery-and,given that,on the whole,PC often develops over many years, it appears unlikely that the supposed Gleason 6 suddenly morphed into a 7 or 8-it just happened to be missed by the blindly placed needles..PSA by itself also appears somewhat spurious-my partner's (and various other people's) tends to fluctuate.. (between 8 and 15 over the last three years-both up and down,so sometimes 4 or 5 points difference within a 3 month period..)There also appear to be several people on another forum where nothing was found after both mpMRI and several biopsies-yet PSA in the twenties or even thirties..As well as some with what is considered 'normal' levels,yet spread to lymphnodes or bones..Are those the 'exceptions'?I really don't know..But it does appear that there are few certainties..The guy who developed the PSA test,Richard Ablin,from what I read, never intended it to be used as a screening test,or indicator of PC-merely as a guideline to keep an eye on things POST SURGERY-as rising PSA might then be considered an indicator of PC remaining-just not in prostate,which isn't there anymore..

very much NOT the case,at least not in our experience-  as far as cipro and 'culture sensitive' goes-in my partner's,and anybody else unfortunate enough to be exposed to 'one stop prostate clincis' for starters-routine dip stick (which is far from culture being grown in lab,just a 2 min procedure, a bit worthless,as it merely ,sort of,might show whether there is an infection)prior to being rushed into TRUS biopsy..minutes before he was handed a tablet,was unaware of what he was taking,the dirty deed done within less than 20 mins,and then given some more to take at home..and then prescribed another course once he developed a raging infection day after procedure..they are routinely used as 'prophylaxis' in this particular clinic and others too.. I have spoken to people who were given them for SUSPECTED,(not even confirmed) UTIs,ear infections,in eye drops-all without cultures being grown..am aware that in some places they do a rectal swab before biopsy,to establish whether cipro might be effective or not-but not many that I am aware of..

thanks again for your input-I was referring to you speculating about MY qualifications :) but thank you for sharing yours,I appreciate it..my partner (along with countless other people,quite a few more than likely not even aware of the presence of PC-sometimes this may be a good thing..) is also one of the people living with PC-though I doubt he would call himself a survivor..we simply don't know for sure what it is he is living with,what sort of treatment (if any,he has had none so far bar monitoring-with ambiguous results,it seems to us) he might consider/look into-so I guess we are /have been pretty lucky compared to others..I too have been studying and looking into it in detail for the last three years,a lot of it in the spirit of inquisitiveness,as well as wanting nobody else to experience what we went through as far as diagnosis and subsequent treatment by health professionals goes..