Is it likely that prostate cancer that has spread to the liver will also be found elsewhere?

Answer 1

90% of the time, prostate cancer that has spread involves the bones.

Answer 2

my grandfather had prostate cancer it spread to his liver and 2 months later had gone all through his bones he passed away 3 weeks later

Answer 3

Once the cancer cells start breaking off and moving around, tey can go anywhere the blood stream can take them. The only exception is the heart, because it has its own blood delivery system that provides 25% more oxgen than the rest of the body gets, and that somehow keeps the heart from getting cancer. You will not be able to find a doctor who has personally treated a heart cancer victim. And the blood/brain barrier keeps cancer cells out, generally. Other than that, the rest of the body is fair game.

That's the bad news. Now more bad news--if you live in the U.S. and rely on your oncologist, you are going to die. The reason has nothing to do with the caliber of person he is, or his level of training and experience--the problem is that he is limited in the treatment options he can use.

There are more and more reports by establishment oncologists doubting the value of chemotherapy, even to the point of rejecting it outright. One of these, cancer biostatistician Dr. Ulrich Abel, of Heidelberg, Germany, issued a monograph titled Chemotherapy of Advanced Epithelial Cancer in 1990. Epithelial cancers comprise the most common forms of adenocarcinoma: lung, breast, prostate, colon, etc. After ten years as a statistician in clinical oncology, Abel became increasingly uneasy. "A sober and unprejudiced analysis of the literature," he wrote, "has rarely revealed any therapeutic success by the regimens in question in treating advanced epithelial cancer." While chemotherapy is being used more and more extensively, more than a million people die worldwide of these cancers annually - and a majority have received some form of chemotherapy before dying. Abel further concluded, after polling hundreds of cancer doctors, "The personal view of many oncologists seems to be in striking contrast to communications intended for the public." Abel cited studies that have shown "that many oncologists would not take chemotherapy themselves if they had cancer." (The Cancer Chronicles, December, 1990.)
"Even though toxic drugs often do effect a response, such as a partial or complete shrinkage of the tumor, this reduction does not prolong expected survival," Abel finds. "Sometimes, in fact, the cancer returns more aggressively than before, since the chemo fosters the growth of resistant cell lines." Besides, the chemo has severely damaged the body's own defenses, the immune system and often the kidneys as well as the liver.
In an especially dramatic table, Dr. Abel displays the results of chemotherapy in patients with various types of cancers, as the improvement of survival rates, compared to untreated patients. This table shows:
-In colorectal cancer: No evidence survival is improved.
-Gastric cancer: No clear evidence.
-Pancreatic cancer: Study completely negative. Longer survival in control (untreated) group.
-Bladder: No clinical trial done.
-Breast cancer: No direct evidence that chemotherapy prolongs survival; its use is "ethically questionable."
-Ovarian cancer: No direct evidence.
-Cervix and uterus: No improved survival.
-Head and neck: No survival benefit but occasional shrinkage of tumors.

Radiation is also crap. Research it for yourself.

The only real chance you have is in alternative medicine.

http://curezone.com/diseases/cancer/

Best of luck.

Answer 4

Yes it is likely, once the spread starts it isnt good news.

Answer 5

It could also be in the bone marrow, and several other places. NOT a good prognosis!