Prostate Cancer More Likely to Metastasize With Active Surveillance

www.cancernetwork.com/prostate-cancer/prostate-cancer-more-likely-metastasize-active-surveillance

Don't see that anyone has posted this link -

Not to diminish Active Surveillance - I believe I would be on AS had I been Gleason 6. Always the trade-offs.

Best to everyone
WIlderness

Wilderness,

I don't think anyone in North America would call what they did in the ProtecT study "active surveillance." Here's why:

The first randomized clinical trial comparing active surveillance, surgery and external beam radiation tells us little :-(

Section 3 addresses their "active surveillance" protocol.

This study has been discussed here on other prostate cancer forums.
The agreement among those familiar with AS programs is that there is little relationship between standards devised in the U.K. In the late 1990's and a current American Active Surveillance program.

The criteria for patient selection and monitoring are far different today, as are the imaging, blood, urine, and genomics tests, which simply did not exist in 1997.

So, as someone who has been in a strict AS program for eight years, I find this article alarmist and lacking applicable credibility.

Wilderness -
Thanks for posting that link, and all other posters on this one, (Paxton-hello my new Brother)(Works Out-not knowing your exact Birth date, so 83% probability of you are 63, 17% probability that you are 62) and especially Tall Allen for this discussion.

I like that Cancernetwork.com site for basic info. For me, I need to learn how to digest such studies better,only getting a small taste so far. Not so sure this applies to me in future treatment.

ASAdvocate,-Thanks for being one of our most popular posters for the past two years here on HW. That trial may have been discussed here, I remember reading about it, but it is a little hard to find on the HW history, I mistakingly put "protect" in the search bar, I found some good discussion though , listed under "protecT", and "protecT trial". Thanks ASAadvocate for that comment about past discussions and for that direction and words.

However, for me, someone on aggressive treatment for four years, and with all due respect to our differing outlooks and situations, in the words of Hugh Grant in Knotting Hill, "I feel completely opposite", the article does not seem alarmist or lacking credibility as far as I see it. Maybe I'm ignorant of some info and importance and relevance about this one. We must learn to be discerning ,I know. I am still learning, still just a layman, an everyman, eager to learn though.
Best regards indeed to all.
Dan in 75 degrees So Cal

Post Edited (Wings of Eagles) : 10/27/2016 10:02:34 PM (GMT-6)

Jgr75...wishing you the best for your AS. What was your diagnosis, if you don't me asking? Gleason score, etc?