Prostate cancer & annual checks

[Cowsham]

Moderator note: this topic was split from the topic about Sir Chris Hoy viewtopic.php?p=1876593#p1876593

Chris says there is hope

https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Fw ... s%2Fm2%2F4

But urges men to get checked even if you never have any symptoms.

A friend of mine ( about 13 years older than me ) had no symptoms. Then one day at the age of 62 he had a sore hip. He put it down to arthritis and eventually went to the doctor.

He was given 6 months to a year. The doctors told him he'd probably had prostate cancer for 5 to 10 years without symptoms of any kind. He was told to get his affairs in order but the doctor asked him if he wanted to try a new drug which might help ( it was one of the first of that type of drug I think ) . It did help and he lived another 14 years. He did have lots of liver problems and the drugs had to be changed from time to time when his skin got very jaundiced.

I've been getting my prostate checked every year since he told us about the diagnosis. I've been preaching that to all my workmates and friends.

Now it's just a blood test so it's very easy to do and if caught early is one of the easiest cancers to treat.

[Pebble]

Chris says there is hope

https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Fw ... s%2Fm2%2F4

But urges men to get checked even if you never have any symptoms.

A friend of mine ( about 13 years older than me ) had no symptoms. Then one day at the age of 62 he had a sore hip. He put it down to arthritis and eventually went to the doctor.

He was given 6 months to a year. The doctors told him he'd probably had prostate cancer for 5 to 10 years without symptoms of any kind. He was told to get his affairs in order but the doctor asked him if he wanted to try a new drug which might help ( it was one of the first of that type of drug I think ) . It did help and he lived another 14 years. He did have lots of liver problems and the drugs had to be changed from time to time when his skin got very jaundiced.

I've been getting my prostate checked every year since he told us about the diagnosis. I've been preaching that to all my workmates and friends.

Now it's just a blood test so it's very easy to do and if caught early is one of the easiest cancers to treat.

what is the test ? I had one some years ago and the doc said the score I had meant I would probaly never get prostate cancer - which is good cause that is what killed my dad, or at least thats where it started and it spread everywhere (mid 80s)

[Cowsham]

Chris says there is hope

https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Fw ... s%2Fm2%2F4

But urges men to get checked even if you never have any symptoms.

A friend of mine ( about 13 years older than me ) had no symptoms. Then one day at the age of 62 he had a sore hip. He put it down to arthritis and eventually went to the doctor.

He was given 6 months to a year. The doctors told him he'd probably had prostate cancer for 5 to 10 years without symptoms of any kind. He was told to get his affairs in order but the doctor asked him if he wanted to try a new drug which might help ( it was one of the first of that type of drug I think ) . It did help and he lived another 14 years. He did have lots of liver problems and the drugs had to be changed from time to time when his skin got very jaundiced.

I've been getting my prostate checked every year since he told us about the diagnosis. I've been preaching that to all my workmates and friends.

Now it's just a blood test so it's very easy to do and if caught early is one of the easiest cancers to treat.

what is the test ? I had one some years ago and the doc said the score I had meant I would probaly never get prostate cancer - which is good cause that is what killed my dad, or at least thats where it started and it spread everywhere (mid 80s)

What doctor told you that ? I'd get a second opinion on that statement. Isn't prostate cancer the single most common cancer in men?

https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Fp ... s%2Fm2%2F4

One guy I talked to that had his treatment ( successfully ) said to me -- which I don't think is true -- " sure every man takes prostate cancer" but if you get it your chances of survival are extremely good if you get it early.

There's no history of it as far as I know in our family but I still get my PSA blood test done every year. I have no symptoms, neither did my friend and neither did Chris Hoy.

By the time my friend and Chris knew anything about it, it was too late ( inoperable ). My friends was in his bones, lungs and even brain but he responded very well to the drug treatment but some don't.

[Jdsk]

Now that this is a separate thread...

Here's the current position of the National Screening Committee (and it's under review):
https://view-health-screening-recommend ... te-cancer/

That contains and links to the basic information on why there isn't a screening programme, and why measuring PSA in asymptomatic individual men might not be a good idea.

Jonathan

[Pebble]

Chris says there is hope

https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Fw ... s%2Fm2%2F4

But urges men to get checked even if you never have any symptoms.

A friend of mine ( about 13 years older than me ) had no symptoms. Then one day at the age of 62 he had a sore hip. He put it down to arthritis and eventually went to the doctor.

He was given 6 months to a year. The doctors told him he'd probably had prostate cancer for 5 to 10 years without symptoms of any kind. He was told to get his affairs in order but the doctor asked him if he wanted to try a new drug which might help ( it was one of the first of that type of drug I think ) . It did help and he lived another 14 years. He did have lots of liver problems and the drugs had to be changed from time to time when his skin got very jaundiced.

I've been getting my prostate checked every year since he told us about the diagnosis. I've been preaching that to all my workmates and friends.

Now it's just a blood test so it's very easy to do and if caught early is one of the easiest cancers to treat.

what is the test ? I had one some years ago and the doc said the score I had meant I would probaly never get prostate cancer - which is good cause that is what killed my dad, or at least thats where it started and it spread everywhere (mid 80s)

What doctor told you that ? I'd get a second opinion on that statement. Isn't prostate cancer the single most common cancer in men?

My GP - here is a snipped from the letter

I hope it is accurate.

[Jdsk]

what is the test ? I had one some years ago and the doc said the score I had meant I would probaly never get prostate cancer - which is good cause that is what killed my dad, or at least thats where it started and it spread everywhere (mid 80s)

My GP - here is a snipped from the letter

I hope it is accurate.

The test is prostate specific antigen, PSA, usually performed on a single specimen of peripheral blood.

Had you already discussed your father's disease and other family history and possible risk factors with the GP?

Jonathan

[Pebble]

what is the test ? I had one some years ago and the doc said the score I had meant I would probaly never get prostate cancer - which is good cause that is what killed my dad, or at least thats where it started and it spread everywhere (mid 80s)

My GP - here is a snipped from the letter

I hope it is accurate.

The test is prostate specific antigen, PSA, usually performed on a single specimen of peripheral blood.

Had you already discussed your father's disease and other family history and possible risk factors with the GP?

Jonathan

No, this was 2018 years ago, I had presented with needing to pee a lot (esp when cycling) and it burning when I did. - The rubber gloves were snapped on and I was told the protrate was slightly enlarged and and and that was likely to be the cause.
A couple of month later I was back to normal (I think I had an infection or something ?) Never had any bother since, I don't think I pee any more than normal, don't have to get up during the night or anythig.

[Jdsk]

If you have any concerns about your risk of prostate cancer I recommend talking to your GP and including your family history and making sure that the PSA result is available.

Jonathan

[Cowsham]

what is the test ? I had one some years ago and the doc said the score I had meant I would probaly never get prostate cancer - which is good cause that is what killed my dad, or at least thats where it started and it spread everywhere (mid 80s)

What doctor told you that ? I'd get a second opinion on that statement. Isn't prostate cancer the single most common cancer in men?

My GP - here is a snipped from the letter

I hope it is accurate.

I hope it's right too cos mine is around the same usually. No family history -- but I get that checked every Jan Feb time along with a full blood test for other stuff.

Curiously when I'm exercising a lot / gym / bicycle etc something is odd about my liver numbers but if I rest for a week before my MOT it's normal. Also I've heard that cycling can affect the PSA ( raises it slightly I think -- not sure ) doc once told me I may have Gilbert's syndrome. Won't do me much harm apparently.

[axel_knutt]

There's a discussion of the merits of the PSA test here, including all the disbenefits and other causes of high PSA. 30% of men have prostate cancer that will never harm them.

I'd be interested to know whether anyone's ever looked at whether increase in PSA is any more predictive or reliable than absolute level.

[Jdsk]

...
I'd be interested to know whether anyone's ever looked at whether increase in PSA is any more predictive or reliable than absolute level.

It's widely used to assess progress. Sometimes described as "PSA velocity" or by the doubling time. And it's a major component of "watchful waiting".

Jonathan

PS: Across biomarkers in general it's often helpful to look at within-individual change because in addition to the information about progress it also helps to reduce the effect of between-individual variation on interpretation.

[Cowsham]

...
I'd be interested to know whether anyone's ever looked at whether increase in PSA is any more predictive or reliable than absolute level.

It's widely used to assess progress. Sometimes described as "PSA velocity" or by the doubling time. And it's a major component of "watchful waiting".

Jonathan

One of my workmates went through that -- frequent testing to access how fast the PSA levels went up and eventually had to go for treatment successfully clearing some cancer spots.

PS: Across biomarkers in general it's often helpful to look at within-individual change because in addition to the information about progress it also helps to reduce the effect of between-individual variation on interpretation.

Hence the need to have a regular check.

[simonineaston]

I've been getting my prostate checked every year since he told us about the diagnosis. I've been preaching that to all my workmates and friends.

I'm glad it's that blood test now, as I was running out of the necessary thick skin to go back yet another year to ask my gps to check manually...
re preaching to w'mates & friends, I do same with power of attorney and there are always individuals who will state exactly why they don't & wont need it, minutes into the conversation. I have learnt just to raise the idea, briefly state my case then leave it at that.

[mjr]

Curiously when I'm exercising a lot / gym / bicycle etc something is odd about my liver numbers but if I rest for a week before my MOT it's normal. Also I've heard that cycling can affect the PSA ( raises it slightly I think -- not sure )

Why do so many of the screening tests have trouble with normal physical activity? I know someone who was told off for having cycled to their mot and called back for extra testing as a result. That just seems completely wrong to me. Surely the tests should be set up to expect normal physical activity and it should be the people who don't follow medical advice who get extra tests?

[scottm]

Curiously when I'm exercising a lot / gym / bicycle etc something is odd about my liver numbers but if I rest for a week before my MOT it's normal. Also I've heard that cycling can affect the PSA ( raises it slightly I think -- not sure )

Why do so many of the screening tests have trouble with normal physical activity? I know someone who was told off for having cycled to their mot and called back for extra testing as a result. That just seems completely wrong to me. Surely the tests should be set up to expect normal physical activity and it should be the people who don't follow medical advice who get extra tests?

Not sure if this is a serious question, but as discussed above the test checks for elevated/high PSA levels. Cycling can temporarily raise PSA levels, therefore there's little point in performing the test if the patient has recently cycled as this could affect the test result.

There are several issues with the accuracy/usefulness of this test as a couple of posters have mentioned above, but if you're going ahead with the test then it's obviously important to remove the influence of any confounding factors.