Are tumours more aggressive in young men?

[Guest guest]

Ever since I was diagnosed as a ‘young man’

I have been told that tumours diagnosed in young men are more aggressive than

those diagnosed in older men.

At the time of my diagnosis I and another ‘young

man’ searched the Internet for any studies that supported this view and ultimately

came to the conclusion, rightly or wrongly, that this was another medical myth

or belief because we could not find any such studies. The closest we could get

was Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Gleason DF, Barry MJ. Competing risk analysis of

men aged 55 to 74 years at diagnosis managed conservatively for clinically

localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998 Sep 16;280(11):975-80 which however did

not support the concept since it showed that marginally less young men were

diagnosed with aggressive disease than older men. Contrarily in those few cases

when men were diagnosed at a younger age with aggressive disease they had a slightly

shorter life expectancy than older men with similar diagnoses.

Since that search, I cannot recollect seeing any

studies that compare aggressiveness stratified by age, yet I have now seen a

letter from the Director of Marketing & Development, Dattoli Cancer Center

& Foundation which says in part <snip> Studies indicate that the

younger a man is when diagnosed, the higher the chances are of his cancer being

aggressive. <snip> I have mailed the center to ask them to provide me

with details of these studies as this is indeed an amazing statement. They are

saying there is a reverse correlation between age and aggressiveness, as I read

it. That the older men are the less aggressive their tumours will be? Surely

not?

Can anyone in this Forum give me any good references

to studies that relate aggressiveness to age? I am not too interested in views

that people have developed, but good evidence that what the marketing and

development people at Datolli says is correct.

Another startling item of the Director of Marketing

& Development’s letter was this <snip> While most people think of prostate cancer as an

“old man’s disease,” it does occur in otherwise healthy young

men. We have seen it and treated it in men in their 20’s. <snip> The

latest SEER summary says: <snip> From 2004-2008, the median age at

diagnosis for cancer of the prostate was 67 years of age.X Close

Table I-11 (http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/

1975_2008/results_single/ sect_01_table.11_2pgs.pdf) Approximately 0.0% were

diagnosed under age 20; 0.0% between 20 and 34; 0.6% between 35 and 44; 9.1%

between 45 and 54; 30.7% between 55 and 64; 35.3% between 65 and 74; 19.9%

between 75 and 84; and 4.4% 85+ years of age. <snip> I know that there

can indeed be some men diagnosed under 35 and not show up on a statistical

analysis like this, but how common is this occurrence? Again does anyone have

any good solid data on that aspect of the disease.

I have to say that this part of the letter seems to aimed

at nudging a ‘young man’ into early treatment despite the fact that

his diagnosis is one that would fit the “Insignificant Disease’ or

Low Risk definitions.

All the best

Prostate men need enlightening, not frightening

Terry Herbert - diagnosed in 1996 and still going

strong

Read A Strange Place for unbiased information at http://www.yananow.org/StrangePlace/index.html