rsilver said...
The most common one I have seen is the first mentioned above based on American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.
It, the old ASTRO (1997) definition, may be "common" because it was used in a lot of old, now outdated studies. The problem with it was that it sent a lot of men to unnecessary tests for clinical recurrence. It's correlation with clinical failure and survival was abysmal. In January 2005, ASTRO met in Phoenix, AZ and came to a new consensus - nadir+2 (the Phoenix definition) for biochemical recurrence after radiation. It was chosen because studies showed a
much better correlation with clinical recurrence after external beam radiation. Many studies reported biochemical failure both ways for a several years to facilitate comparability or because they were originally set up with the older definition. So, your oncologist using 3 consecutive rises represents a giant step backward.
By the way, you got the old ASTRO definition wrong - it was
three consecutive increases over nadir, not two. It also included the proviso that any of the rises be great enough to prompt salvage treatment.
It is arguable whether the same definition ought to be used for protons, brachy or ablation. I would leave it to experts in those fields who have a lot of experience with patients, and what markers are the best predictors of clinical failure. For the most part, they all use the Phoenix definition.
It doesn't matter how famous a medical oncologist is, he is a
medical oncologist, and you are asking him questions outside of his specialty, which probably explains why he hangs on to outmoded definitions.
I had blood in semen and none in urine, which is why prostatitis was suspected rather than a UTI. Because of a history of using fluoroquinolones, my urologist assumed I was resistant and used another kind instead. I would not assume an antibiotic taken for a sinus infection would take care of it. In fact, most prostatitis does not respond to antibiotic therapy at all, but often will remit (and relapse!) on its own. Your proton doc gave you good advice - wait 6 months and test again.
- Allen