Men Over Age 50 are being Victimized by Overly Agressive Surgery!
Sources: Duke Medical School, International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, Vol. 82, Issue 5, 1 April 2012, p. 781; NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer; National Institute for Health & Clinical Excellence; James Buchanan Brady Institute at Johns Hopkins Memorial Hospital; Sloan Kettering Memorial Hospital
Editorial
After 30 years of Medical Malpractice Litigation, I have come to recognize that medicine has patterns of treatments falling in and out of vogue every 10-20 years. Over 20 years ago, women were almost routinely given hysterectomies for a wide range of post menopausal symptoms including bleeding and cramping. Women with Breast Cancer invariably underwent radical mastectomy, the standard of care in the 1980′s. Did our Mothers, Sisters, Wives and Girlfriends require these surgeries? The emergence of a number of non-surgical treatment options that have been just as effective lead one to question the wisdom of the times. I used to think it was a function of women utilizing medical services 3x more than men or that it was simply bad luck to have been born a woman in modern society. Perhaps there was simply way too much money involved in surgeries, operative times, anesthesia times and inpatient postoperative stays for the US healthcare system to slow itself down and reflect?
Lately, a good portion of my practice, has focused upon men and their healthcare experiences. It has been my observation that there is a significant amount of prostate surgery, stemming from the overly agressive approach to prostate cancer treatment. All too often surgeries are scheduled for men with prostate cancer at such an early stage that it does not represent a life-threatening condition. Add to this the reports of misread biopsies, mis applied PSA scores and overly read scans and the results are a staggering amount of radical prostatectomies. Of course there are those who will blame the Medical Malpractice trial lawyers for creating a climate of fear among physicians, leading them to suggest surgery. This argument makes little sense. Cancer is a lot like being pregnant, either you’re positive or you aren’t. And why is there a disproportionate amount of surgery in the male 50 to 80 years of age group? If one lives long enough, they will get prostate cancer -currently affecting 1 out of 6 men. This is actually more prevalent than breast cancer, which affects 1 out of 8 women. However, studies following autopsy have demonstrated that even where prostate cancer is present, it has not been the cause of death in 90% of men. Prostate cancer tends to be slow growing (indolent) and non-recurrent.
So why all the surgery? And what does this mean for men age 50 and older? First, be very careful with your choice of a Urologist. A competent urologist is most likely to obtain a good biopsy sample of the prostate. Be aware that the Pathologist who interprets the biopsied tissue may make an error as well leading to our Second recommendation. Get a second opinion. In most cases you will basically feel healthy. Make sure you aren’t being misdiagnosed or overly diagnosed. Look at the stock market lately. The company which pioneered robotic sugery, originally for women and now for the prostate, is at an all time high. The Global Market for surgical robotics is expected to exceed 5 billion by 2015. Most metropolitan and now suburban hospitals have invested considerable amounts of capital in robotic and minimally invasive surgeries to bring more patients through their doors and into their operating rooms. This is not a train that is easily derailed.
I am certainly not against new technology and constantly push hospitals and physicians to move toward more state-of-the-art practices in the cases I bring on behalf of my clients. I am simply warning that not all surgeries are indicated and that prostatectomy -no matter how robotic or “minimally-invasive” involves the disconnection and reconnection of vital structures and nerve endings which can and does result in temporary (and sometimes permanent) loss of sensation, erectile dysfunction and incontinence. Consider your options carefully and make well informed choices.
Have you or a loved one been diagnosed and treated for prostate cancer? Contact the Lewis Law Firm for a free consultation.
Posted by: Gayle R. Lewis, Esquire
Physican Group Advocates Less Testing for Patients.
Sources: Choosing Wisely.org (An Initiative of the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation) Press Release; NY Times Health Blog
Under the “educational initiative” of Choosing Wisely, led by the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation and involving 8 other specialty boards are recommending less routine testing for their patients. The thought process is that unnecessary testing is costly to the health care system and may actually harm patients. The move comes, not surprisingly, as insurance companies and third party payors (The US Government) are looking to shift costs back to hospitals and physicians. If there is any doubt as to the financial focus, the initiative is openly partnering with Consumer Reports on the initiative. The lists are presented as a series of questions (which will likely follow as practice recommendations) that patients and their physicians should question with suggested answers, including:
Q. Do patients need brain imaging scans (CT or MRI) after fainting, also known as simple syncope? A. Probably not. Research has shown that, with no evidence of seizure or other neurologic symptoms during an exam, patient outcomes are not improved with brain imaging studies. (American College of Physicians)
Q. Do patients need stress imaging tests for annual checkups? A. Not if you are an otherwise healthy adult without cardiac symptoms. These tests rarely result in any meaningful change in patient management. (American College of Cardiology)
Q. Should patients going into outpatient surgery receive a chest x-ray beforehand? A. If the patient has an unremarkable history and physical exam, then no. Most of the time these images will not result in a change in management and has not been shown to improve patient outcomes. (American College of Radiology)
Q. Do patients need a CT scan or antibiotics for chronic sinusitis? A. Most acute rhinosinusitis resolves without treatment in two weeks and when uncomplicated is generally diagnosed clinically and does not require a sinus CT scan or other imaging. (American Academy of Allegry, Asthma & Immunology)
Q. Should dialysis patients who have limited life expectancies and no signs or symptoms of cancer get routine cancer screening tests? A. These tests do not improve survival in dialysis patients with limited life expectancies, and can cause false positives which might lead to harm, over treatment and unnecessary stress. (American Society of Nephrology)
The Organizations, representing some 375,000 physicians, who released lists of questions with Choosing Wisely are: The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology; The American Academy of Family Physicians; The American College of Cardiology; The American College of Physicians; The American College of Radiology; The American Gastroenterological Association; The American Society of Clinical Oncology; The American Society of Nephrology; and The American Society of Nuclear Cardiology.
From the press Release: “Today these societies have shown tremendous leadership in starting a long overdue and important conversation between physicians and patients about what care is really needed,” said Christine K. Cassel, M.D., president and CEO of the ABIM Foundation. “Physicians, working together with patients, can help ensure the right care is delivered at the right time for the right patient. We hope the lists released today kick off important conversations between patients and their physicians to help them choose wisely about their health care.” Consumer Reports (CR) – the world’s largest independent product-testing organization – is working with the ABIM Foundation and the specialty societies to lead the effort.”
Even specialists such as oncologists (cancer doctors) are being urged to cut back on scans for patients with early stage breast and prostate cancers that are not likely to spread rapidly. Patient advocacy groups and other specialists have expressed caution, warning that the directives could be misinterpreted and applied too broadly at the expense of patients.
If you or a loved one have been harmed by poor medical care, contact the Lewis Law Firm for a free consultation and opinion. The Lewis Law Firm is dedicated to improving the quality of health care delivery in Pennsylvania and New Jersey.
Posted by: Gayle R. Lewis, Esquire
Prostate Cancer -Get the Facts
Sources: US Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC), Cancer.org
Other than skin cancer, prostate cancer is the most common cancer Amercian men will face. 1 in 6 men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer. The American Cancer Society 2012 estimates for prostate cancer in the United States are:
- 241,740 new cases of prostate cancer will be diagnosed
- 28,170 men will die of prostate cancer
The average age at the time of diagnosis is about 67. Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in men, behind only lung cancer. 1 in 36 men will die from prostate cancer. However a good percentage of men diagnosed with prostate cancer will survive:
- The relative 5-year survival rate is nearly 100%
- The relative 10-year survival rate is 98%
- The 15-year relative survival rate is 91%
A note on survival rates: The 5-year survival rate refers to the percentage of patients who live at least 5 years after their cancer is diagnosed. Some will live longer and some will only live 5 more years after a diagnosis. Keep in mind that 5-year survival rates are based on patients diagnosed and first treated more than 5 years ago, and 10-year survival rates are based on patients diagnosed more than 10 years ago. Modern methods of detection and treatment mean that many prostate cancers are now found earlier and can be treated more effectively. If you are diagnosed this year, your outlook may be better than the numbers reported above. These survival rates are based on previous outcomes of large numbers of men who had the disease, but they cannot predict what will happen in any particular man’s case.
Risk Factors
Not all men with these risk factors will develop prostate cancers, but more will than not.
- Age -More thatn 65% of prostate cancer diagnoses are made over age 65
- Race -African Amercian Males are 60% more likely to be diagnosed than Caucausians and have 2.5x more mortality. Asian men (living in Asia) have the lowest risk
- Genetics -Family history is important. Having a father or brother with prostate cancer increases the risk 2x
- Geography -Men who live North of Philadephia PA (40 degrees latitute) have the highest risk of death from prostate cancer. The theory is that inadequate sunlight for 3 months every year decreases vitamin D
- Smoking -While a risk factor for ALL cancers, smoking has been linked with more aggressive prostate cancer
- Diet -A lack of leafy green vegetables is associated with more aggressive prostate cancer
- BMI (Body Mass Index) -Obesity is linked with more aggressive prostate cancer
Signs of Prostate Cancer
These are just some of the symptoms associated with prostate cancer. Some men have no symptoms at all : Weak or interrupted flow of urine; Frequent urination (especially at night); Trouble urinating; Pain or burning during urination; Blood in the urine or semen; Pain in the back, hips, or pelvis; Painful ejaculation; Elevated PSA (prostate specific antigen).
Treatment of Prostate Cancer
Although treatment options vary depending upon the stage of prostate cancer, these are the most common current treatment options for men:
- Watchful waiting -That’s correct. The most common treatment is doing nothing but waiting until the cancer reveals itself on testing or scanning
- Radical prostatectomy -Surgery to remove the prostate, with newer robotic guidance it may be possible to remove the prostate without damaging nerves that are necessary for an erection
- External-beam radiation therapy -Directed to the prostate and any areas of potential spread
- Implant radiation therapy -With radioactive “seeds”
- High-intensity focused ultrasound -Designed to break up the tumor to facilitate removal
- Experimental treatment
If you or a loved one have been diagnosed with prostate cancer and you believe there was a delay in the diagnosis, contact the Lewis Law Firm for a free consultation and opinion. The Lewis Law Firm has a history of litigating cases of delayed diagnosis of prostate cancer.
Posted by: David M. Schwadron, Esquire
Are Stem Cells the Answer to the Cancer Question?
Sources: American Cancer Society; Medical News Compilation
In 2012, approximately 1.6 million people will be newly diagnosed with cancer and approximately 577,000 Americans are expected to die from the disease (American Cancer Society).
There has been a lot of press deveoted to the the potential of targeting cancer stem cells directly to treat and eliminate the disease. Unlike mature cells in the body, stem cells have the ability to self-renew and/or mature into another type of cell with a more specialized function, such as a muscle cell, a red blood cell, or a brain cell. This is one reason they have been investigated extensively as a means for repairing or even growing new tissue and organs. Genetic mutations or other factors may give rise to CSCs that possess the same capacity for self-renewal and can mature into cancer cells that comprise the tumor.
The traditional therapy for cancer has been, surgery, chemotherapy and radiation, the later two of which have limited selectivity in targeting only cancer and can easily damage healthy tissue in the process. Recently, however, pharmaceutical companies have been purshasing assets which appear to be directed to cancer stem cell research and development. Dainippon Sumitomo Pharma Co., Ltd. has announced plans to acquire Boston Biomedical, Inc., for up to $2.63 billion. Boston Biomedical’s lead program for inhibiting cancer stem cells in addition to other cancer cells, BBI608, is entering Phase 3 (advanced) trials in patients with colorectal cancer.
Geron Corporation is another company making the plunge into stem cell inhibition with Imetelstat [GRN163L], a telomerase inhibitor that has been shown to effectively inhibit cancer stem cells from a broad range of tumors. Imetelstat is in Phase 2 trials for non-small cell lung cancer, metastatic breast cancer, essential thrombocythemia and multiple myeloma.
ImmunoCellular Therapeutics Ltd. is developing a vaccine, ICT-107, which is in Phase 2 development for the treatment of glioblastoma multiforme [GBM]. Verastem, Inc. (The name really tips it) is a new upstart biotech company expectd to file an investigational new drug application [IND] with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration [FDA] to initiate a Phase 1 clinical trial of its product, VS-507.
If names like the smaller Eclipse Therapeutics, Inc., Formula Pharmaceuticals, KaloBios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,, OncoMed Pharmaceuticals, Stemica LLC and Stemline Therapeutics don’t sound familiar then perhaps they will make some news in the next 2 years. All of them have produced or are producing antibodies, vaccines, and molecular products designed specifically to target cancer stem cells. Some of them already have products in clinical trials.
Posted by: Gayle R. Lewis, Esquire
Re-thinking Chemotherapy.
Source: Medical News Today; Science journal
Chemotherapy used to be a very blunt instrument. The chemicals used in chemotherapy were originally developed for destruction of human life of the battlefields of World Wars (ie. Mustard gas). This is once of the reasons why chemotherapy causes injuries to other organs, damaging symptoms such as hair loss, and even secondary cancers. More recently, oncologists (doctors who specialize in cancer treatment) have benefited from advances in genetics to sharpen chemotherapy. One of the newest advances is predicting the “life-cycle” of cancer cells so that doctors can target cancers which might be easier to kill. More accurately they can identify those cancer cells that are close to the end and can push them (chemically speaking) off the ledge.
For those of you who want the technical explanation, here it goes: (The rest of you can skip to the next paragraph) It all comes down to proteins -in this case BH3 peptides within the BCL-2 family. BCL-2 proteins cause apoptosis (the process of cellular death) and scientists believe that they can influence this process by adding BH3 peptides to tip cell balance in favor of apoptosis vs. replication. In a very literal sense, the scientists are able to trick the cancer cells into committing cellular suicide. In the admittedly small study of tumors from 85 patients, including myelomas, leukemias and ovarian cancers, the chemotherapy was most successful against tumors which had the greatest mitochondrial tiping in the laboratory.
It may not sound like much to most people, but this is a radical new way of looking at exactly how chemotherapy works. It has been thought for years that chemotherapy attacks rapidly proliferating (fast growing) cells which eventually group to form tumors. This doesn’t really explain why chemotherapy doesn’t work effectively against skin cancers, for example. The idea that chemorherapy is effective mainly against cancer cells which are close to dying may aid in the development of new chemotherapy agents which have less collateral damage.
Posted by: Gayle R. Lewis, Esquire
New Cancer Drug Extends Life of Patients with Advanced Melanoma
Source: MEDSCAPE; FDA; Yervoy.com
The FDA recently approved a new cancer drug for patients with advanced stages of melanoma (skin cancer). Melanoma has proven to be one of the most diffcult cancers to treat effectively. In a study of patients who had advanced melanoma, those who got an experimental drug lived a median of about 10 months, compared with 6.4 months for those in a control group. After two years, about 23 percent of those who got the drug were alive, compared with 14 percent in the control group. While 4 months might not sound significant, Dr. Steven J. O’Day of the Angeles Clinic and Research Institute in Santa Monica, Calif., a lead investigator in the melanoma trial, called the result “historic,” adding, “This is the first randomized placebo-controlled trial ever to show a survival benefit in Stage 4 melanoma.”
Ipilimumab (marketed as Yervoy®) is an anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen (CTLA)-4 monoclonal antibody that has been approved in the US for the first- or second-line treatment of patients with malignant melanoma. In English, that means the drug basically removes checks on the immune system, by blocking the action of T cells. T cells are often referred to as the “soldiers” of the immune system which initiate the fight against invading cells. It should also be noted that 10-15% of patients who took Yervoy in this study suffered severe side effects because their immune systems attacked their own organs. 7 out of 540 who received ipilimumab died from these immune effects, according to reports of the study published online by The New England Journal of Medicine.
Melanoma is the leading cause of death from skin disease. An estimated 68,130 new cases of melanoma were diagnosed in the United States during 2010, and about 8700 people died from the disease, according to the National Cancer Institute. “Late-stage melanoma is devastating, with very few treatment options for patients, none of which previously prolonged a patient’s life,” said Richard Pazdur, MD, director of the Office of Oncology Drug Products in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Ipilimumab “is the first therapy approved by the FDA to clearly demonstrate that patients with metastatic melanoma live longer by taking this treatment.”
Bristol-Myers Squibb, makers of Yervoy, are hoping that the drug also proves effective in the treatment of prostate cancer.
According to the FDA and Yervoy’s website, common adverse effects from autoimmune reactions associated with ipilimumab use include fatigue, diarrhea, skin rash, endocrine deficiencies (gland or hormone), and inflammation of the intestines (colitis).
Posted by: Gayle R. Lewis, Esquire
Radiation Still Common Treatment for Cancer
Source: MD Becker Partners, Life Science Digest; American Cancer Society
An estimated 1.1 million patients were treated with radiation in 2009, representing an increase of 15% from 2007 according to a market research study published by IMV Medical Information Division.
The clinical application of radiation therapy in oncology (using high-energy radiation to shrink tumors and kill cancer cells) dates back to the early 1900s when radium was used to successfully treat a pharyngeal carcinoma in Vienna. By the 1930s, fractionated X-rays were used to cure a group of patients with inoperable cancer of the larynx. Today, radiation therapy remains a cornerstone of cancer treatment and is often used in combination with surgery and chemotherapy.
Radiation can be delivered to a cancer patient using several techniques. These include using a machine outside of the body (external-beam radiation therapy), placing radioactive material in the vicinity of cancer cells (internal radiation therapy, or brachytherapy), and systemic radiation therapy using injected substances (radiopharmaceuticals) that travel in the blood to seek and destroy cancer cells.
Despite numerous medical and scientific advances following its clinical introduction more than a century ago, radiation therapy is an important and growing treatment option for breast, prostate, lung and other cancers. A recent article in the Journal Cancer suggests that 52% of all cancer patients should receive radiation. The American Cancer Society expecting approximately 1,596,670 new cancer cases to be diagnosed in 2011.
However, most types of radiation do not specifically attack cancer cells and cause injury to normal tissues surrounding the tumor. The goal of radiation therapy is to maximize the dose delivered to tumor cells while minimizing exposure to normal, healthy cells. For Prostate Cancer patients, complications of radiation include: bleeding; irritation and pain; urinary frequency; urgency; and, incontinence. Radiation therapy directed to the chest is commonly employed to treat lung, esophageal, breast and lymphoma cancers. However, lung inflammation caused by radiation therapy, called radiation pneumonitis, is the most common complication.
Given the prominent role of radiation therapy in cancer treatment, the development of novel agents that protect normal tissue against the effects of ionizing radiation represents a large market opportunity and unmet medical need.
Post: Gayle R. Lewis, Esquire
Coffee ~the next wonder drug for Cancer?
Source: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, BBC Health
Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed male cancer in the USA, and the country’s second biggest cancer killer, after lung cancer. 16 million males worldwide are cancer survivors; 2 million are American.
A recent publicized study now suggests that men who drink six or more cups a day are 20% less likely to develop any form of the disease. They were also 60% less likely to develop an aggressive form which can spread to other parts of the body. The study looked at about 48,000 men in the US who work as health professionals. Every four years between 1986 and 2006, they were asked to report their average daily intake of coffee. Even relatively small amounts of coffee – one to three cups per day – were found to lower the risk of lethal prostate cancer by 30%. No difference was seen between caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee, suggesting caffeine itself was not the cause. So what is it about coffee?
The study’s lead author, Kathryn Wilson is quoted as saying: “At present we lack an understanding of risk factors that can be changed or controlled to lower the risk of lethal prostate cancer. If our findings are validated, coffee could represent one modifiable factor that may lower the risk of developing the most harmful form of prostate cancer.”
Coffee apparently contains several compounds which have been found to regulate insulin, reduce swelling (inflammation), and act as antioxidants – all of which are also beneficial in reducing the risk of prostate cancer.
A recent study of some 6,000 Sweedish women suggests that drinking more than five cups a day halves a woman’s risk of aggressive breast cancer (estrogen receptor negative). Previous studies have also shown that coffee reduces the risk of developing diabetes type 2, gallstone disease, Parkinson’s disease, liver cancer, and cirrhosis of the liver.
Study Highlights:
- Adult males who drank at least six cups of coffee a day had an almost 20% lower chance of developing any type of prostate cancer.
- Those drinking at least six cups of coffee a day had a 60% lower chance of developing the aggressive/lethal form of prostate cancer.
- The risk reduction was seen equally among both drinkers of caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee.
- Moderate coffee drinkers (1 to 3 cups per day) had a 30% lower chance of developing lethal prostate cancer
Obviously the authors add that further studies are needed to confirm their findings. If confirmed, then prostate cancer protection should be added to the benefits of regular coffee drinking. So, maybe those $4 non-fat lattes you’ve been ordering for the past 2 years will finally pay off in unexpected ways.
Post: David M. Schwadron, Esquire
TRUS Procedure -Transrectal ultrasound biopsy of the prostate
Source: Medscape; urologychannel.com
In 2010, some 217,730 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer and 32,050 men died from prostate cancer. 1 in 6 men will be diagnosed with cancer of the prostate at some time during their lifetime. The major predetermining risk factors appear to be: 1.) Being male; 2.) Age; 3.) Family History.
The prostate is a walnut-sized gland located beneath the bladder and in front of the rectum in men. The urethra (transports urine and sperm out of the body) passes through the prostate to the bladder neck. Prostate tissue produces prostate specific antigen (PSA).
Ultrasound involves a special device (a transducer) to reflect high-frequency sound waves off internal structures to create detailed images called sonograms. Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), also called prostate ultrasound, provides images of the prostate and surrounding tissue and allows the physician to examine the gland for abnormalities (e.g., enlarged prostate [BPH], prostate cancer).
Patients may be instructed to discontinue blood-thinning medications (e.g., aspirin, ibuprofen) for a week to 10 days prior to undergoing TRUS and prostate biopsy. An antibiotic (e.g., ciprofloxacin) may be prescribed prior to and for a couple of days following the procedure to help prevent infection.
The procedure: Transrectal ultrasound is performed with the patient lying on his side with his knees bent, involves using a small cylinder-shaped transducer, which is lubricated and inserted into the rectum, and a monitoring device. The transducer directs high-frequency sound waves into the body. As these sound waves are reflected back to the transducer, it creates images (sonograms). If the results of TRUS are suspicious for prostate cancer, a prostate biopsy is performed. A biopsy needle is projected through the tip of a probe inserted through the rectum to the prostate. The biopsy needle is used to extract a tissue sample from one or more areas of the prostate. The biopsy samples are sent to a pathologist (a doctors who identifies diseases by studying cells under a microscope) who analyzes the sample(s) for the presence of prostate cancer. A score called a Gleason score is assigned to each sample. Higher Gleason scores suggest aggressive tumors that likely require aggressive treatment.
Complications of Procedure: Transrectal ultrasound is not associated with significant side effects or complications. Following prostate biopsy, patients may experience blood in the urine (hematuria), in the semen (hematospermia), or in the stool, and a dull ache in the perineum (area between the anus and the scrotum). These side effects are usually minor and diminish within 1–2 weeks. Men may be advised to refrain from sexual intercourse for 3–5 days. If the patient develops a large number of blood clots or cannot urinate, the physician should be contacted immediately.
Post: David M. Schwadron, Esquire
Better Testing for Prostate Cancer on the Horizon?
Source: Cancer Research UK; BBC Health News; US National Cancer Institute
It is estimated that 217,730 men will be diagnosed with and 32,050 men will die of cancer of the prostate in 2010. Expressed differently, based on rates from 2005-2007, 16.22% of men (or “1 in 6” men) born today will be diagnosed with cancer of the prostate at some time during their lifetime. Unlike Breast Cancer, the major predetermining risk factors appear to be: 1.) Having a prostate; and, 2.) Age. Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men in the UK, with new cases diagnosed in around 37,000 men every year.
Now researchers in the UK are working to develop a genetic screening test to tell doctors which men with prostate cancer need more aggressive treatment. Men with high levels of cell cycle progression (CCP) genes appear to have the most deadly form of prostate tumors.
The only practical test currently available to doctors is the Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) test, which does not always lead to correct diagnosis or treatment.
Elevated PSA’s could be due to factors other than prostate cancer but should not be ignored.
One of the research leaders, Professor Jack Cuzick, has been quoted as saying, “Our findings have great potential. CCP genes are expressed at higher levels in actively growing cells, so we could be indirectly measuring the growth rate and inherent aggressiveness of the tumour through our test” and, “It’s really encouraging that this could also be applied to prostate cancer, where we desperately need a way to predict how aggressive the disease will be.”
In the study, men with the highest levels of CCP genes were 3x more likely than those with the lowest levels to have a fatal form of prostate cancer. And for patients who have had surgery to remove their prostate, those with the highest CCP levels were 70% more likely to have a recurrence of the disease.
As with most cancer research, the study is still early and it will be a while before any men will benefit from these research efforts.
Post: David M. Schwadron, Esquire