Ben Stiller

Just read another report that said his treatment was 2 years ago, but no details. Apparently he was on the Howard Stern show when he revealed the dx and treatment.

So sorry to hear about Ben Stiller but I am so glad that he has become an advocate for PSA testing. He said the PSA test saved his life, just as the PSA test saved my life as well. No matter what health officials, insurance companies or anybody else say until and unless something better comes a long I will always encourage all men to get tested.

I think he said it was "intermediately aggressive," rather than "immediately aggressive." I take that to mean he was probably Gleason 7. He also pronounced himself "cured," which is something I hesitate to say about myself, knowing full well that it can recur years down the line.

I did like the fact that he mentioned the risk of incontinence and erectile dysfunction but said that "life" was his primary concern.

alephnull said...
He was Gleason 7 (3+4)

Another great example, then, of someone whose life was never at risk turning it into a dramatic moment before, apparently, learning about how PC actually works...

Info can be found in an article on yahoo and they have a link to an essay he wrote on his experience...I don't know how to put in links here so maybe someone else will. Both were interesting..

No, it is debatable.
Some people with PC actually never do learn about how it works, so I went out an a limb...

Clock

I thought the comment was odd and that is why I quoted it. To me it inferred urgency. Intermediate wouldn't mean life threatening.

This does make one wonder how much research was done. Kind of like when Arthur Blamk was dx and quickly went to surgery. As to Jacks comment of course it is debatable. Many PCa treatment directions are.

Here's a link to Stillers piece on his diagnosis, decision making, and treatment. He does give the impression that a Gleason 7(3+4) is more aggressive than we consider it to be in the absence of other information, but then again that other information is absent in his story. He doesn't mention the number of positive cores or his actual PSA readings and there are values for those other indicators that would have made a Gleason 7(3+4) sufficiently risky to easily justify treatment.

/medium.com/cancer-moonshot/the-prostate-cancer-test-that-saved-my-life-613feb3f7c00#.qdwhbnjmc

And I should point out that he does touch on the controversies of PSA screening and the overtreatment of low-risk disease.

In his writeup he said...
The criticism of the test is that depending on how they interpret the data, doctors can send patients for further tests like the MRI and the more invasive biopsy, when not needed. Physicians can find low-risk cancers that are not life threatening, especially to older patients. In some cases, men with this type of cancer get “over-treatment” like radiation or surgery, resulting in side effects such as impotence or incontinence. Obviously this is not good; however it’s all in the purview of the doctor treating the patient.

So I give him high marks for at least mentioning the controversies, even if some here might wish he had come down on the other side of them. And we have no way of knowing that his decision making was flawed. We'd need to know more about his PSA value, the number of positive cores in his biopsy, and what his MRI showed. There are certainly some cases of Gleason 7(3+4) disease that require aggressive treatment -- we have no way of knowing (at least from the article I read) if Mr. Stiller was one such.

It must be nice to be young and use the word, cure.

You nailed it halbert. Overtreatment has given Prostate Cancer a bad name. Many men, celebrities or not, have avoided public discussion about it like the plague because it is widely associated with unnecessary erectile disfunction, loss of continence and other difficult to discuss topics. What we need is a public figure who doesn't over react by rushing into aggressive treatment by going public, instead, with an Active Surveillance strategy. Let's hear some of the good stories.

I for one, did not know of Ben's PC case. Sounds like he's doing well.

My case is an example, some might say less common, of a troublesome Gleason 7. I was dx. as 4+3, pathology showed 3+4. Should have been a good thing.

My urologist of nearly 10 years said from the start, that there are Gleason 7 cases that are more difficult to treat than a Gleason 8 or higher, being that Gleason 8 cases often respond well to aggressive treatments. Where, there are Gleason 7 cases that continue onward despite full and aggressive treatments.

I blew though both surgery and SRT in slightly more than 12 months time, and still dealing with a steady rising PSA. The VA has mine listed as Metastatic Prostate Cancer, Stage III. The last VA doctor that checked my PSA, told me point blank, that he no longer cared what the number was. Not much different than the opinion of my last civilian oncologist. Still waiting to meet the new oncologist to see what his take is.

With all the increasing bone pain in both legs (from hips to ankles) I wouldn't be a bit surprised if I didn't start lighting up soon on a full bone scan. Hopefully not.

I didn't know about his cancer either until the news tonight. I am just glad he got the PSA test, made a treatment decision that he thought was best, and feels cured. More importantly, that he is another celebrity that gets the word out on this cancer and the importance of PSA test to be done.