Where we are in the story so far ...
* 46 yo, diagnosed with prostate cancer April 2023
* MRIs were negative, ultimately diagnosed via biopsy
* Gleason 3+4, last PSA 6.3, 6 cores with 3+3, 2 cores were 3+4
* PSMA PET Scan prior to surgery was clean
* Had RALP procedure on September 26, 3 weeks ago
Side effects seem manageable so far, but it's early days.
Unfortunately, my surgical pathology was not what we were hoping for. While the primary tumor was organ confined (negative margin), there was no seminal invasion, no upgrade in Gleason scoring (10-20% Gleason 4), they did find 1 of 8 removed lymph nodes had ... 2mm of cancer. It spread. They also found criboform morphology and "prostatic intraductal adenocarcinoma".
Frankly, I've been in shock and a degree of depression for days.
I found a service that will test the DNA of my sample against a cheek swab sample to rule out lab error. I don't expect to find there to be lab error, but it's relatively cheap in the grand scheme of things.
Likely I'm facing a very, very difficult decision: whether to pull out the hammer now, go after what could be remaining with everything we got (radiation, ADT, chemo, or subset thereof) or wait for signs of recurrence. The medical way of saying the same thing: adjuvant or salvage therapy.
I've seen 2 oncologists so far. Can you guess what they said? 1 said adjuvant therapy, the other said salvage.
1. Dr. Scholz, medical oncologist, thinks I should strongly consider, due to my age, adjuvant radiation and hormone therapy and even, possibly chemotherapy. If I was in my 70s, he said, a "wait and see" approach would be reasonable ("no brainer"). To be clear, Dr. Scholz is saying, even if my PSA comes back undetectable, he suggests treatment (this is what adjuvant means). It doesn't matter what my first PSA reading is.
2. Dr. Hsi, a well regarded radiation oncologist here in Seattle, claims that there's a growing consensus over the last 5 years showing no benefit to adjuvant radiation therapy over salvage radiation. (I asked him what studies -- he cited RAVES and RADICALS to those in the know). To put it rather crudely and probably unfairly (to him), it's kind of old school thinking now to say adjuvant is better. Waiting for biochemical recurrence (or outright failure, I haven't had my first PSA reading yet) prevents unnecessary treatment, and any treatment has risk.
I'm in a bit of a tailspin. I feel lost in the cracks of all this. I studied and studied, and it wasn't enough. Now I have to ... read and understand various studies on the efficacy of adjuvant radiation? It's all over my head. Am I going to intepret a study wrong and get my treatment wrong? I'm not a trained doctor here.
I'm 46 and am terrified of the idea of living for 20 years on various forms of hormone therapies and chemotherapies, of not being able to work again, or have joy again. Just being honest. It's hard.
Not sure what to do. If you have advice, been in a similar boat, or know someone who has, I'm all ears. Thanks for listening.