HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

prostrate cancer at age 80

Support Forums
>
Prostate Cancer
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 8/11/2015 2:28 PM (GMT 0)
just had bone scan and crt. What should be readings
Posted 8/11/2015 2:40 PM (GMT 0)
Hi Phyllis. Welcome to the forum. You will need to provide more details on the situation please. Was there a biopsy? When? What is the PSA reading? Gleason score? Do you have results of the scans?
Posted 8/11/2015 4:07 PM (GMT 0)
Welcome to HW.

I am not sure I understand the question. If you could provide us with some more information, we could give you better answers.

It's possible to have PC at 80, but the question would be if it needs to be treated or not. Not all cancers require aggressive treatment and depending on your diagnosis, it's possible that you can just monitor it and not suffer the side effects of treatment.
Andrew
Posted 8/12/2015 12:10 AM (GMT 0)
Phyllis, in order to better answer your questions, please share some more information:

What is the current PSA? What has PSA been doing over the last few years?
If there was a biopsy, what are the results? There will be information about Gleason scores, # of positive cores, %involvement in the cores.

If you share these data points with us, we can better answer the questions. Like Andrew-in-the-shop said, at 80, if the scores are low, then you may not have to do anything....unless he's planning to live to 105, that is.
Posted 8/12/2015 1:50 PM (GMT 0)
Phyllis,

The bone scan and the CT scan are used to look for cancer that may have escaped from the prostate, either into surrounding tissues or to form more distant metastases, usually to bone or lymph nodes. These scans are often done after cancer is found in a biopsy sample when the doctors want to know how extensive it is to decide on the best treatment or management strategy.

You mention that he is 80 years old. Prostate cancer is usually a very slow-growing problem and very often when it is found in men of that age nothing needs to be done about it except, sometimes, medication to slow its progression or to help with any symptoms.

His doctor should explain the results of the scans. Without knowing a bit more about his history it is hard for us to tell you what to expect. If the cancer was found because of some sort of pain the bone scan might show where it is so it can be treated.

Welcome to the forum. Sorry you find yourself here but glad you found us.
Posted 8/21/2015 8:08 PM (GMT 0)
Scan and Ct show no metastases. Gleason 7, Psa 9.27. Dr. has suggested hormone therapy (Lupron) for approx. 8 weeks, followed by radiation 5 days a week for 8 weeks. Trying to decide at this age if there is any advantage to the treatment and the side effects.
Posted 8/21/2015 8:23 PM (GMT 0)
That's a really good question to ask, Phyllis...a really good question.

I'll share with you a couple of background points which may or may not weigh into your decision, but are good to know nonetheless...

First, know that the doctor ordered bone and CT scans even though the standard for these test is a significantly more aggressive case...for an asymptomatic case (no symptoms), the lower threshold for the tests is a PSA value of 20 ng/mL and a Gleason score of 8. These are the minimum recommendations; your case is far below that. Most doctors would not have even ordered the bone scan and CT because the risk of mets was minuscule.

Second, you haven't shared here what the set of circumstances was that led to biopsy, but know that the professional medical societies recommend stopping PSA testing for men who have not yet been diagnosed with prostate cancer once they reach the age of 75.

Third, know that autopsy studies of men who died in accidents have shown that the percent of men who had PC was roughly equal to their age. So, 80% of 80-year olds have at least a measurable amount of PC, and most of them don't know they have it and they never will know it, and it won't bother them. In many cases, they simply have not run across the set of circumstances which led to a biopsy.

Best wishes...
Posted 8/22/2015 12:08 AM (GMT 0)
I'd let it ride, but I'm no doctor. They'll be some expert opinions coming. I was surprised, for example, that Warren Buffett had radiation therapy for prostate cancer last year at 83 or 84.

I was 48 and didn't have a choice.
Posted 8/22/2015 7:38 AM (GMT 0)
Hello Phyllis,

My Dad was diagnosed at the age of 79, with a PSA of over 300 and extensive spread, unfortunatly the radiation route wasn't an option for him, he was admitted into A&E because he was unable to urinate. This was when he was diagnosed, his health went down hill very fast, had kidney stents due to cancer blockage.

He has had may treatments along the way but the first was 3 monthly hormone injections this worked really well for him very few side affects, his life improved greatly and for some time he was back to normal. Walking 7 miles cross country a couple times a week, and living a active life.

PSA 9.27 is not so very high. his PSA is no where near what my Dad's was, but depending on what his symptoms are I certainly recommend trying the hormone injection. At the beginning of this journey it is hard to take everything in, this is a great place to get information and support. Remember that any treatment is the choice of the patient and if something is tried and the patient isnt happy with it you can always stop it. Take one day at a time. consider the recommendations your given, don't be frightened to ask any questions don't agree to anything your not happy with. its the patients life.
Best wishes
Posted 8/22/2015 11:16 AM (GMT 0)
Phyllis,

As JackH mantioned, there are some rules-of-thumb for how prostate cancer is treated based on the patient's age. By those rules he probably doesn't need treatment, or maybe he should just do the hormone shots and skip the radiation. Most guys his age will have a little bit of prostate cancer if you go looking for it but prostate cancer grows slowly (usually) and it doesn't cause any symptoms until it is quite advanced. The majority of men his age won't live long enough for the slow-growing cancer to ever bother them and they are better off letting it go untreated rather than risking the side-effects of treatment. Or, if they are treated, the goal is to manage the disease to avoid it becoming symptomatic, and to treat any symptoms as they occur, rather than trying to "cure" it.

Those are the rules for all 80 year olds taken as a group. When you are talking about an individual 80 year old there are some more things to take into account. The rules-of-thumb assume a certain remaining life-expectancy for an 80 year old based on averages but some very healthy, active individuals can be expected to live a lot longer. If he has a realistic shot of living to be 100 then the radiation makes more sense.

I've done the radiation. It's not an awful experience. The main side effects are usually fatigue, problems with hemorrhoids, and odd bowel changes.

He should probably start the hormone shots whether or not he finally decides to do the radiation. The shots will keep the cancer from progressing -- not forever but usually for years -- and will certainly give him time to think about whether he wants to go ahead with the radiation. There is no hurry making the decision about the radiation.
Posted 8/22/2015 11:24 PM (GMT 0)
when I was getting irradiated there were a couple of really old guys receiving treatment. if your dad is healthy I would definitely consider treatment. his cancer is aggressive and fairly advanced but he has an excellent shot at a cure.

good luck.

ed
Posted 8/22/2015 11:26 PM (GMT 0)
Dewayne -- you had a choice. Buffet was treated because he wants to live and is healthy and active.

ed
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply