I'm interested in conversations about and I want to talk about
Know exactly what you want?
Show search

Notification

Error

Relapse Time

User
Posted 26 Jan 2024 at 22:58

Well after nearly eight years of undetectable PSA since a prostatectomy in April 2016 my PSA has risen to 0.17 since September 2023. Decision making around taking a shot at salvage radiation to the prostate bed or waiting for PSA to rise and be visible on a PSMA scan, told 0.5 is a good point. Balance this against seeing guidance to have early intervention, but seems like a gamble without a scan, any opinions or experience to be shared? 

Thanks

Ian

Edited by member 27 Jan 2024 at 08:21  | Reason: Not specified

User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 01:25
Agree it's a bit of a gamble. Have you obtained the view of your Urologist and an Oncologist on this because they will have a better idea of likelihood from your histology and their experience of what happens most often, especially in the light of good time to have PSMA scan and chance of PCa being in YOUR Prostate Bed? I know of several cases where RT to the Prostate Bed has given long term remission but it will not eradicate micro mets not picked up before or after a PSMA scan. At eight years ago it has been quite a time for micro cancer cells to travel and your professionals will also have to take this factor into account in making a recommendation.
Barry
User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 21:04

Originally Posted by: Online Community Member
What’s the oncologists view on using menopause tablets for PCa?

That's exactly what the PATCH trial is doing, but using transdermal (through the skin) patches rather than tablets. Taking estrogens orally causes problems in the liver which can result in thrombosis, but taking estrogens transdermally does not cause this effect.

Some HRT medications also contain progesterone which you definitely don't want, unless you want to grow fully functional breasts.

User
Posted 28 Jan 2024 at 07:04
Peter2016 your PSA and timescales are almost identical to mine. I have taken 8.5 years to get to 0.11 from <0.006 with various ups and downs on the way.

Having just retired from a job with private medical cover I have been fortunate to have access to private consultations, second options and PSMA PET scans.

In summary the recommendation not to treat a slow doubling time recurrence until 0.2 is now universal in my experience and supported by large scale trials that show ZERO benefit to treating before 0.2.

Re PSMA PET and the salvage radiation "blind" dilemma, this was explained very succinctly to me at my last Royal Marsden consultation. PSMA PET is very poor at localising prostate bed recurrence because of the massive hot spot caused by the bladder (The radio ligand is excreted via urine). So a negative PSMA PET in a biochemical failure scenario could be seen as a positive reason to target the prostate bed.

Hence waiting until 0.5 when it may be visible in lymph nodes means you missed the opportunity to kill it in the prostate bed. Waiting until >0.5 is also clinically proven to have worse outcomes.

Show Most Thanked Posts
User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 01:25
Agree it's a bit of a gamble. Have you obtained the view of your Urologist and an Oncologist on this because they will have a better idea of likelihood from your histology and their experience of what happens most often, especially in the light of good time to have PSMA scan and chance of PCa being in YOUR Prostate Bed? I know of several cases where RT to the Prostate Bed has given long term remission but it will not eradicate micro mets not picked up before or after a PSMA scan. At eight years ago it has been quite a time for micro cancer cells to travel and your professionals will also have to take this factor into account in making a recommendation.
Barry
User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 08:07

Hi Barry

thanks for your thoughts and yes I have discussed, but actually changing consultant due to having relocated. My plan is to move over to an oncologist and certainly will have the conversation about micro cancer cells. Advice varies on PSMA scans, wait to see more at 0.5 - 1 or go for the prostate bed at 0.2. Seems like a shot in the dark to have ST without some idea where the PSA rise is coming from, although I read that 70/80% of reoccurrence after 5 years is found in the prostate bed area. 

User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 08:44

Hi it seems each NHS trust has its own criteria my husband's psa reached 0.18 and they wanted him to have ADT injections and pelvic bed radiation but I asked him to wait before rushing in bc he wouldnt cope well with ADT injections as he is not active, estrogen patches can just as easily achieve chemical castration without all the accompanying side effects of ADT but they are dragging their heels rolling it out so my husband is having phytoestrogens that I use for menopause instead 

Scans havent identified anything and again I know my husband would have issues with willy nilly radiation on his pelvic bed bc he has an irritable bladder 

If they found mets to target I would be all for it 

I can't fault the wonderful NHS surgeon who did the Robotic RP but I am hesitant about ADT for my husband 

https://www.mrcctu.ucl.ac.uk/studies/all-studies/p/patch-pr09/

 

 

 

Edited by member 27 Jan 2024 at 08:59  | Reason: Add more info

User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 08:50
Sort of in the same boat - consultant will refer me for SRT once it reaches 0.2 but says that a PET scan won't see anything until it gets to at least 0.5 - obviously I don't want it to get that high so I'll take SRT as soon as it's offered.
User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 09:10

Ian, I had surgery in 2014, I had a recurrence three years after surgery, at that time PSMA scans were not so widely used and I was refused the PSMA. My salvage RT to the prostate bed was based on a "very educated guess and years of experience". My PSA did drop so I assumed something was in the bed. My PSA continued rise and in 2022 a PSMA picked up a tumor in a lymph node but nothing lit up in the prostate bed. Following SABR treatment to the lymph node the PSA increased again and another PSMA scan lit up another lymph node and I had more SABR treatment. I still have a PSA of 0.44.

So the "guess" that cancer was in the bed was presumably correct and the SRT to the bed appears to have been successful. The PSMA scan in 2022 did not pick up the tumor that was later found in 2023 but they used a different tracer and the prostate bed was still clear in 2023.

We have two guys on here, one had a scan at below 0.1 and it found something another had a scan at 200 and it found nothing.

There is no guarantee the PSMA scan will see anything and not seeing anything does not mean nothing is there. I the last couple of weeks there has been talk about false negatives and false positives with PSMA scans.

Thanks Chris 

User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 15:27
It also has to be remembered that about 8% of men do not express sufficient PSMA for a result, we had at least one such member on this forum.
Barry
User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 20:25

Originally Posted by: Online Community Member

Hi it seems each NHS trust has its own criteria my husband's psa reached 0.18 and they wanted him to have ADT injections and pelvic bed radiation but I asked him to wait before rushing in bc he wouldnt cope well with ADT injections as he is not active, estrogen patches can just as easily achieve chemical castration without all the accompanying side effects of ADT but they are dragging their heels rolling it out so my husband is having phytoestrogens that I use for menopause instead 

Scans havent identified anything and again I know my husband would have issues with willy nilly radiation on his pelvic bed bc he has an irritable bladder 

If they found mets to target I would be all for it 

I can't fault the wonderful NHS surgeon who did the Robotic RP but I am hesitant about ADT for my husband 

https://www.mrcctu.ucl.ac.uk/studies/all-studies/p/patch-pr09/

 

 

 

 

What’s the oncologists view on using menopause tablets for PCa? 

User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 20:53

Originally Posted by: Online Community Member

Hi it seems each NHS trust has its own criteria my husband's psa reached 0.18 and they wanted him to have ADT injections and pelvic bed radiation but I asked him to wait before rushing in bc he wouldnt cope well with ADT injections as he is not active, estrogen patches can just as easily achieve chemical castration without all the accompanying side effects of ADT but they are dragging their heels rolling it out so my husband is having phytoestrogens that I use for menopause instead 

Scans havent identified anything and again I know my husband would have issues with willy nilly radiation on his pelvic bed bc he has an irritable bladder 

If they found mets to target I would be all for it 

I can't fault the wonderful NHS surgeon who did the Robotic RP but I am hesitant about ADT for my husband 

https://www.mrcctu.ucl.ac.uk/studies/all-studies/p/patch-pr09/

I would not assume the Estradiol patches will become generally available, unfortunately. As mentioned, many side effects of ADT are reduced, although breast gland growth is increased (and Tamoxifen cannot be used as it stops the patches from working, as was discovered accidentally on the trial). However, there are additional issues with the patches too. It's difficult to get the Estradiol dosing right, because the patches are not consistent in the dose they manage to deliver through the skin, unlike injections or tablets. This needs significantly more monitoring (including regular Testosterone and Estradiol levels) than is required for the injections, and regular reviews of the number of patches required for each person. Although the patches are cheaper than the injections, when you add in the extra monitoring appointments, I suspect they will work out more expensive. Patches do sometimes fall off with sweat, which can go unnoticed until you next get undressed.

I did talk with the PATCH trial principle investigator about using patches with the injections rather than instead of them. This is done off-label in the US which gives the effectiveness of the injections and reduction in the ADT side effects along the lines of the PATCH trial, without the extra monitoring required on the PATCH trial. Unfortunately that wasn't part of the PATCH trial, so she couldn't see any route to have that adopted in the UK at the moment. Given the Estradiol patches are generic, there's no drug company to fund such a trial, so it would need to be funded by someone like Cancer Research UK like the current PATCH trial is.

Not all patients having salvage radiotherapy are put on ADT, and you could ask how important your oncologist thinks that is in your partner's case. Another option is to use Bicalutamide rather than the LHRH medications which gives many of the benefits of the Estradiol patches (because it also increases estrogen levels), without the downsides. Bicalutamide alone is increasingly being used for time limited ADT during curative radiotherapy, and in this case you can normally take Tamoxifen (unless you have a history of DVT or cardio issues). (This is completely different from taking Bicalutamide with LHRH injections.)

Nothing you take as a supplement will come anywhere near close to the effect of the ADT medications. If it did, you'd have the gender dysphoria children consuming it by the bucket load, instead of paying a fortune for black market LHRH injections which are also used as puberty blockers in that case.

User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 21:04

Originally Posted by: Online Community Member
What’s the oncologists view on using menopause tablets for PCa?

That's exactly what the PATCH trial is doing, but using transdermal (through the skin) patches rather than tablets. Taking estrogens orally causes problems in the liver which can result in thrombosis, but taking estrogens transdermally does not cause this effect.

Some HRT medications also contain progesterone which you definitely don't want, unless you want to grow fully functional breasts.

User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 23:04

not using "menopause tablets "  but  a phytoestrogen (estrogenic plant) specifically one from the rainforest which is extremely potent I have been using it for years 

User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 23:15

Originally Posted by: Online Community Member

Originally Posted by: Online Community Member

Hi it seems each NHS trust has its own criteria my husband's psa reached 0.18 and they wanted him to have ADT injections and pelvic bed radiation but I asked him to wait before rushing in bc he wouldnt cope well with ADT injections as he is not active, estrogen patches can just as easily achieve chemical castration without all the accompanying side effects of ADT but they are dragging their heels rolling it out so my husband is having phytoestrogens that I use for menopause instead 

Scans havent identified anything and again I know my husband would have issues with willy nilly radiation on his pelvic bed bc he has an irritable bladder 

If they found mets to target I would be all for it 

I can't fault the wonderful NHS surgeon who did the Robotic RP but I am hesitant about ADT for my husband 

https://www.mrcctu.ucl.ac.uk/studies/all-studies/p/patch-pr09/

 

 

 

 

What’s the oncologists view on using menopause tablets for PCa? 

It's not clear that the oncologist knows about it, Turkey. Lizzo has previously posted that she has put all her husband's prescribed HT meds in the garage or somewhere :-/ 

Edited by member 27 Jan 2024 at 23:16  | Reason: Not specified

"Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards." Soren Kierkegaard

User
Posted 27 Jan 2024 at 23:35

Hi,  I'm in a similar situation from an op in 2016.  At 5yrs my psa became detectable at 0,06 then went up to 0.09 but it's stayed near that level for some time.   I was told I'd be referred to Oncology at 0.2 although depending how fast it's going I might push for earlier.   Also I was told a psma scan would be at 0.5 but I consider that too high as well and will seek one or pay much earlier.

You haven't stated your full psa record unless you've only had 1 detectable test although I don't know what your undetectable level is.  It's worth knowing how fast it's developing as that is a big factor.

I'm not sure if an oncologist would convince me to have radiation without a scan, it would be tempting.  I think if I was offered RT without a scan I'd consider paying for a psma scan and I'd prefer it to be at just over 0.2 depending how fast it's growing as it would probably be higher by the time it happened.   Although there's a risk it might tell me things I don't want to know.   

There's also the question of whether to have hormone treatment with RT.   A nomigram I did showed a good increase in probable success with hormones for my Gleason 4+4.   Although with my psa almost static for some time I wonder if it is Gleason 4 or hopefully nothing.  Good luck Peter

 

User
User
Posted 28 Jan 2024 at 07:04
Peter2016 your PSA and timescales are almost identical to mine. I have taken 8.5 years to get to 0.11 from <0.006 with various ups and downs on the way.

Having just retired from a job with private medical cover I have been fortunate to have access to private consultations, second options and PSMA PET scans.

In summary the recommendation not to treat a slow doubling time recurrence until 0.2 is now universal in my experience and supported by large scale trials that show ZERO benefit to treating before 0.2.

Re PSMA PET and the salvage radiation "blind" dilemma, this was explained very succinctly to me at my last Royal Marsden consultation. PSMA PET is very poor at localising prostate bed recurrence because of the massive hot spot caused by the bladder (The radio ligand is excreted via urine). So a negative PSMA PET in a biochemical failure scenario could be seen as a positive reason to target the prostate bed.

Hence waiting until 0.5 when it may be visible in lymph nodes means you missed the opportunity to kill it in the prostate bed. Waiting until >0.5 is also clinically proven to have worse outcomes.

 
Forum Jump  
©2024 Prostate Cancer UK