|
Page 1 of 2  My female friends will probably kill me for saying this: why are they grabbing all the attention for breast cancer, while the noise from advocates for prostate cancer research is merely a blip on the radar?
Once a year, the streets of Dallas and other major cities are clogged with women wearing pink ribbons, jogging shoes and Nikki shoes as they participate in the Race for the Cure, the program operated by the Susan G. Komen Foundation in Dallas to raise money for breast-cancer research and education. All four TV stations in town fly their helicopters over the processions for bird’s-eye views, and a picture most likely will wind up on the front page of the newspaper.
I applaud the foundation and women for getting out there and pounding the pavement—literally. Five of my female friends have endured breast cancer, most of them more than once. Alice, for instance, has fought the demon three times. Kristi saw her cancer spread to her liver.
But, I ask, why aren’t all of us prostate-cancer survivors—and there are a ton of us out there—donning our skimpy jogging shorts, our own colored ribbons and taking to the bricks to fight a disease that strikes one in six men? Where are the helicopters?
Glaring discrepancies Is it that we just don’t like to talk about our . . . . our . . . you, know . . . our prostates . . . or anything “down there?” I can just envision a bunch of prostate-cancer survivors sitting around a table, playing poker, drinking beer, scratching themselves, and belching.
Here’s something I bet you didn’t know: prostate cancer is the single most common cancer in the United States—and the second most lethal among men after lung cancer. Not to diminish the horrors of breast cancer, but more men are stricken with prostate cancer than women are with breast cancer, according to the American Cancer Society.
However, nearly 41,000 women will die from breast cancer this year, compared to nearly 29,000 men from prostate cancer.
A recent article in the New York Times brought to light the glaring discrepancy between the amount of money and public relations for the two diseases.
Once a year, you can buy blue wristbands at the checkout counters of your favorite grocery store after adding your donation for prostate cancer research to your food bill or dropping spare change into the slit in the bottle lid. While breast cancer has pink ribbons, prostate cancer has blue ribbons. Betcha you didn’t know that!
In 2007, the federal government spent nearly $552 million on breast cancer, compared with $306 million on prostate cancer. The U.S. Department of Defense has earmarked $138 million for breast cancer, but only $80 million for prostate cancer.
Can us prostate cancer survivors blame the discrepancies on our nearly impotent PR? You tell me.
Can a blood test predict cancer spread? Meanwhile, a new blood test may help doctors predict the spread of prostate cancer to the lymph nodes just outside the gland nearly 98 percent of the time, researchers at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center say.
“For prostate cancer, we have hit the limit of our ability to classify risk in these patients before initial surgery,” says Dr. Shahrokh F. Shariat, a urologist at the Dallas institution who led a research project on the biomarker. “We currently use the PSA, Gleason grade and a rectal exam, but the predictive value of those tests is inadequate for predicting what cancers will spread.”
What’s more, imaging technology, such as a CT scan, also cannot detect small, but significant, spreads to the lymph nodes, Shariat adds.
The new blood test measures levels of endoglin, a biomarker previously shown to predict the spread of colon and breast cancer and now may do the same for prostate tumors. Shariat’s research shows that a man’s chances of his cancer spreading to the lymph nodes rises by 17 percent for every 1 ng/mL of extra endoglin in his blood.
Dr. Claus G. Roehrborn, head of Southwestern’s urology department, says the blood test would also give doctors a better idea of whether removing a patient’s lymph nodes during prostate cancer surgery is needed.
Despite strides in the treatment of prostate cancer, about 25 percent to 30 percent of the initial treatments—either surgery or radiation—fall to thwart the cancer because the malignant cells have spread outside the gland. However, Shariat and Roehrborn say the present method of lymph-node sampling to judge whether the cancer has spread will have to do until larger studies can confirm that using enoglin as a marker is the way to go. Is 'watchful waiting' also the way to go?
The United Kingdom’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence says men with low-grade prostate cancer should be offered “watchful waiting” instead and not automatically surgery or radiation. Once the tumor shows signs of becoming threatening, then the treatment can begin.
Many non-aggressive cancers are slow growing and may have no effect on a patient for 15 years or more. Since the disease is mainly diagnosed in older men, these patients often reach the end of their normal lives without being bothered by their disease, institute experts say.
But, they warn, their recommendation does not apply to men with moderately or highly aggressive prostate tumors or men who are relatively young and have long life expectancies.
For instance, “watchful waiting” was out of the picture for me when I was diagnosed with moderately aggressive prostate cancer five years ago when I was 48 and had another 40 or so years to live and blog. In other words, if I had waited before choosing surgery, the cancer may have eventually killed me, like it did my grandfather.
|
