HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

Bladder cancer associated with radiation treatment for PC?

Support Forums
>
Prostate Cancer
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 5/11/2017 6:46 PM (GMT 0)
Just wondering how many of my fellow PC guys who had radiation treatments are now experiencing bladder cancer? Seems bladder and rectal cancers are the most common of those who are actually experiencing secondary cancers. Anyone here, besides me, going through the bladder cancer diagnosis and treatments??
Posted 5/11/2017 7:14 PM (GMT 0)
The incidence is very low. A recent study said only 3 out of 290 men develop a radiation induced cancer over a 20 year period. It further stated the none occur in the first 5 years. With yours how do you know it was radiation induced rather than purely bladder cancer that is not connected to the seeds?

My brother in law was treated for PCa with IMRT and a few years later developed unrelated bladder cance. He was always at risk as he had been a long time smoker. His doctors said it was clearly unrelated to the PCa IMRT.
Posted 5/11/2017 11:55 PM (GMT 0)
JNF said, "With yours how do you know it was radiation induced rather than purely bladder cancer that is not connected to the seeds?"

I do NOT know if my bladder cancer was caused by radiation from the nearby seeds and certainly did not mean to imply that I think it was. I realize the possibility of such an incident is rather low and I was merely attempting to determine if any of our fellow PC guys have experienced bladder cancer after radiation for their PC treatments.
Posted 5/12/2017 12:01 AM (GMT 0)
I don't know of many on this forum who've had both PC and bladder cancer. It's not a common combination. Does happen, but you're one of the few I've heard this from.

Sorry to hear you have to deal with it after PC.

Andrew
Posted 5/12/2017 10:06 AM (GMT 0)
My dad had PCa and then a few years later had bladder cancer.

Except he had surgery to remove his prostate. I thought his bladder cancer was probably caused by his longtime work as an auto body shop owner (painting w/out a mask) and smoking.

But there were reports of some medication associated with bladder cancer and my mom actually was part of a class action suit. Not a large award but she did get compensation.
Posted 5/12/2017 11:28 AM (GMT 0)
Yes, unfortunately we've seen a number of others here at HW/PC developing PC then bladder cancer. It is indisguishable whether it was caused by the treatment or not. But...

Radiation causes cancer. Known fact.

Radiation cancer treatment. It's a tightrope. The processes have gotten better and better, without a doubt. The secondary cancers are way down as a result.

Not zero, obviously. Enough to make the HealingWell News page:
http://news.healingwell.com/index.php?p=news1&id=615667

Enough for a "rule of thumb," which I'll simply quote from the article: "...radiation is probably a better treatment choice for older patients rather than younger patients with longer life expectancies, who may be at risk for developing these secondary cancers."

Post Edited (JackH) : 5/12/2017 1:43:13 PM (GMT-6)

Posted 5/12/2017 12:33 PM (GMT 0)
Another note on bladder cancer - my mother died from kidney cancer found when they were evaluating her bladder cancer for treatment. Her oncologist said that bladder and kidney cancers are the second-most common cancers related to smoking, yet only lung cancer gets the national publicity in "stop smoking" campaigns.

My mom was proof that a patient can die just as readily from kidney cancer caused by smoking than from lung cancer caused by smoking.

{OK - I'll step off my soap box now. . . }
Posted 5/12/2017 2:40 PM (GMT 0)
Since we're quoting parts of the article to make our point:

"However, in absolute terms, the absolute risk associated with the development of secondary malignancies in patients exposed to external beam radiation therapy is quite small," Bhojani said."

So yes, there's an increase (for obvious reasons), but the chance is still very small, and we're talking about very long term effects here as well.

Post Edited (searchinginla) : 5/12/2017 12:26:50 PM (GMT-6)

Posted 5/12/2017 4:29 PM (GMT 0)

searchinginla said...
... and we're talking about very long term effects



The adjective you've added, "very" which does not appear in the referenced article, will be individually interpreted in the eye (or age) of the beholder—appropriately differently for someone in their 50s or 60s versus someone in their 70s or 80s...thus, re-emphasizing & re-inforcing the "rule of thumb."

There's probably also a quote in there somewhere about making good progress and continuous improvements in the processes and tools over time, particularly with the "newer" pioneering techniques which have begun to replace the older established RT methods. (I'll say what I've said before, "Thank God for the pioneers!")

Post Edited (JackH) : 5/12/2017 11:51:58 AM (GMT-6)

Posted 5/12/2017 6:28 PM (GMT 0)
You're right, I added emphasis for the quote. BTW we're talking about 20 years or longer here. That's very long in my eyes. But you make a great point, if your life expectancy is another 40 years, 20 years may not be enough.
Posted 5/12/2017 6:41 PM (GMT 0)
erbob...so how are you doing with the bladder cancer? It certainly sucks to draw the cancer card more than once, no matter what the cause. Looks like you had good success on the PCa front, so hope you're having the same success with the bladder cancer.
Posted 5/12/2017 6:50 PM (GMT 0)

searchinginla said...
BTW we're talking about 20 years or longer here. That's very long in my eyes.


You may be "talking about 20 years or longer here," but I'm not.

Is 10-years long in your eyes? Is 15-years long? These are the timeframes to be thinking for late-term radiation side effects. Check with this article at the American Cancer Society website, titled: Long-term side effects of radiation therapy which says (mid-paragraph) "Other types of cancer after radiation exposure often take much longer to develop. Most do not happen until at least 10 years after exposure, and some are diagnosed 15 or more years later."

Certainly, 20 years or longer would fall into the subset of "15 or more years later."

Again, the important point is that one-size-does-not-fit-all. Age (remaining life expectancy) is absolutely one of the important trade-off considerations particularly for younger men to consider when weighing PC treatment options...thus the "rule of thumb."

Post Edited (JackH) : 5/12/2017 1:05:33 PM (GMT-6)

Posted 5/12/2017 7:29 PM (GMT 0)
My best friend died of leukemia that he insisted right to the day he died that he got from the proton radiation treatment for PC. He was 68 when he got the proton treatment for his G6 cancer and his psc went to under 1. Three years letter he was diagnosed with aggressive leukemia and was dead after 9 months. Was it just a coincidence or the radiation that caused his leukemia?
Posted 5/12/2017 7:35 PM (GMT 0)
I'm very sorry to hear of the loss of you best friend, NY-Sooner.

Leukemia is specifically one of the cancers that has been associated with high dose radiation therapy for prostate cancers.

Unfortunately, association (or even statistical correlation) is not causation. There really is no way to prove beyond a doubt they were directly connected. I suspect your question was rhetorical, anyway.

https://www.cancer.org/cancer/prostate-cancer/after-treatment/second-cancers.html


I hope that you won't also mind, NY-Sooner, me pointing out (for the benefit of newcomer and/or future readers of this thread) the sad reality of this instance possibly being linked to aggressive, possibly "elective," (over-)treatments for 3+3 cases which often (you didn't provided enough details to fully assess, and we don't have to go there now) need no treatment at all.

Post Edited (JackH) : 5/12/2017 1:50:03 PM (GMT-6)

✚ New Topic ✚ Reply