Statistics

[Chasbearcat999]

I have read articles, watched videos. Researched until I am numb. One thing I have never found is a breakdown of cases by Gleason score at diagnosis. I read a non-scientific article that said 50% of men need no treatment at all. I would assume they are 3+3. But maybe they are including elderly with Gleason 9. Can't find an answer. Anyone seen that data?

[Tall_Allen]

In the largest active surveillance clinical trial in North America, at the University of Toronto, 52% of men on the protocol have never been treated and have never progressed in 20 years of watching them.

auajournals.org/doi/full/10...

[OldVTGuy]

I asked your question to Googles AI and it said according to the American Cancer Society 91% of diagnosed prostate cancer is G6 or G7, 7% is G8 and 2% is G9. Less than 1% is G 10.

Don’t know how accurate it is but that’s what it spit back.

Makes me feel special as a Gleason 9.

[London441 in reply to OldVTGuy]

The 91% group makes no sense. Placing G6, low volume, organ confined 3+4 and say, high volume 4+3 with 80% pattern 4 in the same category renders the statistic useless. One would need it broken down further than that to know anything.

[OldVTGuy in reply to London441]

It said G6 was 66% and G7 was 25%. It was me that combined them.

I found that interesting. I suppose you never find the G6 guys on the chat boards.

[London441 in reply to OldVTGuy]

You don’t find them on this one, they don’t belong here.

[dentaltwin in reply to OldVTGuy]

Given the changing recommendations for PSA testing, the relative proportions almost certainly would have to be a moving target.

[addicted2cycling in reply to OldVTGuy]

OldVTGuy wrote -- " ... 2% is G9 ... "

Since May 2015 the *top rung of the ladder was reached with my GL10 dx* 😱

[LandManager]

Good question!

[FMOH_N]

Here is a good one:

nature.com/articles/s41379-...

[maley2711]

Hi -

Based on your biopsy upgrade to 4+3 with cribriform, I assume you are not considering AS?

If not, what type of statistics would be meaningful to you?

[Chasbearcat999 in reply to maley2711]

No I'm not considering AS. Right now I've met with surgeon (last resort) , RO for Cyberknife, (leaning in that direction) focal specialist. Focal therapist felt I was ideal candidate because of size and location of lesion. However, he ordered genetic test as mother had breast cancer at 35. If I have a BRCA mutation he doesn't feel focal is a good idea. Insurance approved Cyberknife with SpaceOar. RO feels confident that at isn't required but the original Uro ordered Decipher so RO said to wait on that and see.

I was really just curious about the statistic to see how many cases were similar to mine.

[maley2711 in reply to Chasbearcat999]

Please carefully consider focal. It simply doesn't have the success rates that RP and RO do !!! TA has a review of the numbers on his blog. And there can still be serious side effects with focal ......do your research . Ask the focal Doc for substantiated studies of what he/she offers.

[Chasbearcat999 in reply to maley2711]

He was a second opinion. I didn't know he specialized in focal. That's the dream though, isn't it? Cured. No side effects. But I've decided Cyberknife seems best in my case.

[groundhogy]

Here is a good website to compare odds of cure for the major treatment paths. You have to determine your stage, low risk, intermediate, or high risk (risk of recurrence). So if you are intermediate, pull up the intermediate chart and you can see the odds of 10-20 yr survival, etc. based on the treatment you pick.

prostatecancerfree.org/comp...

It is best viewed on computer or just print it on paper. Not so viewable on phone.

To make the graphs easier to read, i drew a dot on the endpoints of the elipses, and then drew a line through the dots. This turns the elipses into lines.

[j-o-h-n]

Usually half the odds are against you......... the rest are with you.....

Good Luck, Good Health and Good Humor.

j-o-h-n Sunday 08/20/2023 12:59 PM DST