Active surveillance for prostate cancer: The trader won the bet

Mike Steskal, a commodities trader who lives and works just outside Philadelphia, is 55 and was told last summer that he had prostate cancer after his doctor ordered a blood test for flu-like symptoms that happened to include a PSA test.  The PSA test looks for a protein linked to prostate cancers.  His PSA level was slightly elevated, which led to more tests, including a biopsy that showed a Gleason 6 cancer.  

He spent months seeing different doctors, most of whom recommended aggressive treatment because he is so young.  He also researched prostate cancer on the Internet and talked to men who had gone through various treatments.  Finally he chose active surveillance.

As part of the surveillance, he had two more PSA tests.  They came back with levels so low that no one would ever have suspected prostate cancer.  His higher level last summer was probably due to an infection, which can cause PSA levels to rise.  

“It was pure chance” that he got a prostate cancer diagnosis, Mr. Steskal said.  “That’s another thing that went into my decision.”  

Dr. Alan J. Wein, the Chief of Urology at the Perelman School of Medicine, advocates active surveillance for most men with low-risk cancers.  But he emphasizes that they should have a second biopsy within a year, followed by regular biopsies every year or two and regular PSA tests.  

“I tell patients, ‘This is a bet’”, he said. “You are betting that the disease is not going to progress, or if it progresses, you will be able to tell before it progresses to a situation where it less treatable.  You enhance the chances of winning the bet by doing a confirmatory biopsy.”

Ken’s comment:  The false positive PSA test led to a scary misdiagnosis, but Mike was wise to carefully consider the alternative to surgery.  

Thanks to Gina Kolata of the New York Times for the source story on May 24, “The Latest Trend in How to Treat Prostate Cancer:  Don’t.”  Read another story about decision-making on prostate cancer.

Is it better to bring 8,000 individual cases?: Pathology errors in breast and prostate cancer biopsies

Patients impacted by a misdiagnosis and the quality of service at the Miramichi Regional Hospital will file a class-action suit on Tuesday.

Halifax lawyer Raymond Wagner will file the proposed lawsuit in Miramichi on Tuesday. It is available to any patients who had a biopsy or other procedure at the Miramichi Regional Hospital between 1995 and February 2007, regardless of their test results.

"They suffered great mental distress, frustration, and needless anxiety while awaiting confirmation that the original results were correct," he said.

The province is reviewing more than 23,700 cases from the hospital dating from 1995 to 2007 while a public commission is examining the rate of breast and prostate cancer misdiagnoses.

An independent audit of 227 cases of breast and prostate cancer biopsies from 2004-05 found 18% had incomplete results and 3% had been misdiagnosed at the health authority in northeastern New Brunswick, which was being served by a now-suspended pathologist.

Filing a lawsuit will hold the system accountable, Wagner said, adding that arguments revolve around allegations of negligent hiring and poor quality control at the pathology department.

"The suit of course is to assist the people in the community surrounding the Miramichi with respect to their health care," he said. "It is to bring to account the hospital administration with respect to oversight and quality control and to assure the community that their health care is of sufficient quality for them to have confidence in that health care."

A judge will have to decide if the suit will go ahead, which will involve testing whether the lawsuit is the most efficient way to proceed, Wagner said.

"Is it more appropriate and more efficient to have the case determined in one case, or is it better for everybody to bring their own individual cases, in other words 8,000 cases?" he said.

The Halifax law firm, Wagners, is working in co-operation with Newfoundland and Labrador firm Ches Crosbie Barristers.

Advice: Pathologists have to use very subjective judgments in assessing biopsies. Ask the pathologist how certain s/he is about the findings of your biopsy.

Read another Pathology error story.

The source article comes from a posting today on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's website.

The furthest you could be from courageous: Attitudes toward one's own cancer

Although public figures like Teddy Kennedy promote enduring impressions of the stalwart, pumped-up spirit, Dr. Joseph Finns says patients themselves often describe a more nuanced, evolving journey.

When Robert Kosinski was told he had a tumor on top of his brain stem, entwined with his optic nerve, "Everything went dark, went blank," he recalled. "I was overwhelmed by the idea that I had a brain tumor stuck inside me. The train ride home lasted so long and I just kept wondering, 'How long do I have to live?'"

Faced with potentially harrowing repercussions from a biopsy, Robert, a husband and father in Jersey City, said he felt depressed and ultimately alone with his decisions.

He chose not to have the biopsy, and went through chemotherapy. He would endure a dozen blood transfusions. Optimism, or even stoicism, were not part of his emotional makeup during those grueling months. "I never felt brave or courageous," he said. "I don't know what that means. I was scared. I was the furthest you could be from courageous."

That was 15 years ago. Now 61, he paints and attends a monthly support group, where he ascribes his odds-defying survival to luck and medical expertise, rather than personal will. "Some people in my group don't want to hear the upbeat scenario," he said. "The way they're coping is completely the opposite because they feel they may not make it."

Dr. Finns' advice to patients: There's no scripted way to handle this. Write your own script based on your own narrative.

Read a story about Teddy Kennedy’s brain cancer.

Thanks to Jan Hoffman for her source article in the June 1 issue of the NY Times.