Former President Joe Biden diagnosed with 'aggressive' prostate cancer: What to know about the illness and treatment options, according to experts
'While this represents a more aggressive form of the disease, the cancer appears to be hormone-sensitive, which allows for effective management,' Biden's office said, noting that additional scans revealed that the cancer has spread to Biden's bones. 'The President and his family are reviewing treatment options with his physicians.'
As words of support flooded social media, Biden shared a note alongside a photo of himself, wife Jill Biden and their cat on X. 'Cancer touches us all,' he wrote. 'Like so many of you, Jill and I have learned that we are strongest in the broken places. Thank you for lifting us up with love and support.'
Yahoo News spoke to experts about what Biden's prognosis means and which treatments he may choose to receive.
The prostate is a male-only organ found below the bladder and in front of the rectum, and it aids in fertility. Prostate cancer is 'the most common cancer diagnosed in men in the U.S. and the second leading cause of cancer death,' behind lung cancer, Dr. William Oh, a genitourinary oncologist and director of precision medicine for Yale Cancer Center, told Yahoo News.
'We know it is a disease of aging and that it is more common as men get older,' said Oh, who does not treat Biden. He also noted that while people with a family history of prostate cancer, as well as African American men, have a higher risk of developing it, 'we do not know what causes prostate cancer.'
Prostate cancer oncologist Dr. Christopher Wee of the Cleveland Clinic, who also does not treat Biden, told Yahoo News that 'aggressive' is a 'relative term,' but that health care professionals use it to explain that the cancer is 'more likely to grow and spread than the average cancer.' One measure of how aggressive a cancer can be, Wee said, is the Gleason score.
'The more abnormal the cancer cells are, the higher the Gleason score,' he said, noting that the highest score possible is 10 and the lowest score is six.
Biden's Gleason score is a nine, which, Wee said, 'reflects a more aggressive behavior.'
According to the American Cancer Society, the five-year survival rate for prostate cancer when it has spread to other parts of the body is 37%.
'When prostate cancer has spread outside of the prostate, such as to the bone, this is called metastatic cancer,' Wee said. 'Generally speaking, this is not usually considered curable, and it becomes a lifelong disease.'
Metastatic cancer is considered Stage IV.
While treatment can slow its growth, improve or maintain the quality of life and help patients live longer, it's 'very difficult to get too much more specific than that, because there can be people in whom there's only one bone spot, and there can be people in whom there's spots all over the body,' Wee noted. The primary treatment, he said, is to use medicines.
These medicines include 'androgen deprivation therapy [ADT], where we lower the androgens, primarily testosterone, because that is the fuel for prostate cancer,' Wee explained.
'In addition to ADT, patients with metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer will also get a second hormone reducing medicine in a pill form, because there have been multiple trials showing that if patients use ADT plus a hormone reducing pill, they tend to live longer than those who get ADT by themselves,' Wee said. 'And in some circumstances, we even add intravenous chemotherapy as a third medicine.'
Occasionally, a patient may have testicles removed as well.
'Ultimately, these [treatment] decisions are complex,' Wee said. 'No two cases are the same, and it really involves very careful consideration of a patient's cancer, the patient's health and, most importantly, the patient's values and preferences.'
Well-wishes from Biden's peers came shortly after his diagnosis. Former Vice President Kamala Harris extended kind words in an Instagram post, in which she said she and husband Doug Emhoff were 'saddened to learn of President Biden's prostate cancer diagnosis.'
'We are keeping him, Dr. Biden, and their entire family in our hearts and prayers during this time,' she continued alongside a photo of her and Biden in the Oval Office. 'Joe is a fighter — and I know he will face this challenge with the same strength, resilience, and optimism that have always defined his life and leadership. We are hopeful for a full and speedy recovery.'
And former President Barack Obama shared in a post on X that he and former first lady Michelle Obama were 'thinking of the entire Biden family,' writing, 'Nobody has done more to find breakthrough treatments for cancer in all its forms than Joe, and I am certain he will fight this challenge with his trademark resolve and grace. We pray for a fast and full recovery.'
President Trump also reacted to the news on his social media site, Truth Social, stating that he and first lady Melania Trump were 'saddened to hear about Joe Biden's recent medical diagnosis.'
'We extend our warmest and best wishes to Jill and the family, and we wish Joe a fast and successful recovery,' Trump wrote.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
A silver lining in Trump's anti-climate agenda
Presented by With help from Noah Baustin, Annie Snider and Jordan Wolman THE SAFETY IN ENDANGERMENT: The Trump administration is about to roll back the federal government's power to regulate climate change, but a former top Biden administration official sees a silver lining for California. Ann Carlson, a UCLA professor who served as acting administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration under Biden, said the Trump administration's move to nix the so-called endangerment finding — which the Obama administration issued in 2009 and lays out the legal basis for EPA to regulate greenhouse gases as a threat to human health — could open the door for states to create their own emissions rules for the transportation sector. While states are preempted from setting vehicle greenhouse gas standards under Massachusetts v. EPA, a 2007 case that affirmed EPA's authority to regulate those emissions, Carlson said that the federal government getting out of the emissions game would present state leaders with a serious argument that preemption is off the table. That would be especially useful for California, after Congress in June revoked its unique ability to create stricter-than-federal pollution rules. Carlson spoke with POLITICO about the endangerment finding, the Supreme Court and what electric vehicle policies she wants California to push forward. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. It seems counterintuitive that the Trump administration rolling back EPA's ability to reduce greenhouse gases could potentially help California regulate its own emissions. Can you explain your thinking? I would start with the reality that what it looks like when you read the endangerment finding proposal from EPA is that it's essentially making arguments that greenhouse gases are not air pollutants under Section 202 of the Clean Air Act. That's the section that regulates vehicle emissions. So if that's true, then the states presumably are not preempted from regulating greenhouse gases. If you want Massachusetts v. EPA to be overturned, which is essentially what they're arguing, then you're basically saying that the Clean Air Act doesn't cover greenhouse gases, or at least with respect to mobile sources. How exactly would that help a state like California to develop greenhouse gas rules for vehicles? One of the arguments that opponents make against California's special authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate mobile sources is that Section 209, which is the section that both preempts other states and gives California its authority, is really designed to attack air pollution, because historically, that's been California's big problem. Los Angeles has the worst air pollution in the country, and that's really what that provision is about. And so if California is trying to use its authority to regulate greenhouse gases, opponents say that is beyond its scope. But now, if EPA is in fact arguing that Section 202 of the Clean Air Act, which gives it authority to regulate pollution from mobile sources, doesn't cover greenhouse gases, then states aren't preempted from regulating them. You could have 50 states potentially regulating greenhouse gases coming out of vehicles. Do you think that argument would hold up in front of a conservative Supreme Court? What EPA is doing is squarely putting on a collision course the combination question of whether Massachusetts v. EPA should be overturned and whether states can regulate independently because they're not preempted. Let's take power plants as an example. States can regulate greenhouse gases from power plants, because there's no preemption provision in the Clean Air Act. That's why California has its cap-and-invest program, for example. I believe the answer would be that if Section 202 doesn't cover greenhouse gases, there should be no prohibition on states regulating. Does that mean the Supreme Court would agree with me? Who knows. But it would raise a conundrum for them, because the conservatives on the court have been very reluctant to let EPA regulate greenhouse gases ambitiously. This seems to be a serious conundrum for the auto industry, which pushed the administration to revoke California's EV mandate. It's not an accident that the industry has not been urging EPA to withdraw the endangerment finding. If you look at who's aligned with that concept, going back to the first Trump administration, auto companies and the [U.S.] Chamber of Commerce are staying on the sidelines. It's the oil industry generally that has been arguing in favor of doing this. Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order after Trump revoked California's EV mandate, directing state agencies to develop recommendations for maintaining progress. If you were a state regulator, what policies would you advocate for? Incentives are one way to push. For example, replacing the rollback of the federal tax credits is one possibility. Cities and counties can invest in zero-emission technology and consider things like feebates, where you reward buyers of electric vehicles through lower vehicle license fees. You can use the indirect source rules that require stationary sources that attract a lot of vehicle traffic to ensure that some of those vehicles are low-emission or zero-emission. All of those sorts of things are, I think, appropriate. I think the harder question is, can you do enough to replace straight regulation? Yeah, right. That's why this opportunity is potentially interesting. If the endangerment finding is going to go away, maybe California has authority that it didn't think it had. — AN Did someone forward you this newsletter? Sign up here! WAIT FOR US: The Trump administration is jumping into truck manufacturers' lawsuit seeking to dissolve a zero-emission sales agreement with California. The Justice Department's Environment and Natural Resources Division filed the motion to intervene in a Sacramento federal court on Thursday, three days after four truck makers — Daimler Truck North America, International Motors, Paccar and Volvo North America — sued to break a 2023 voluntary agreement with the state. The move is the latest step in the administration's aggressive effort to dismantle California's electric vehicle policies, most notably Congress' June revocation of EPA waivers that allow the state to enforce ZEV mandates. DOJ's filing, like the industry's lawsuit, argues that without the waivers, California no longer has the authority to enforce the Clean Truck Partnership, which was negotiated by nine manufacturers and the Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association. 'Agreement, contract, partnership, mandate — whatever California wants to call it, this unlawful action attempts to undermine federal law,' Acting Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson said in a statement. — AN ROLL OUT THE RED CARPET: A who's who of the California wind energy industry, and their regulators, visited Merced County on Thursday to tour the under-construction Gonzaga Ridge Wind Farm. Just three of the new turbines being installed will produce more power than the 1980s-era installation of 166 turbines that it's replacing, according to the developer, Scout Clean Energy. In total, its capacity will reach 147.5 megawatts. 'That demonstrates how far the technology has come,' said California Energy Commission Chair David Hochschild as he gazed at the site. 'This is what the future looks like.' Besides the state's top energy boss, POLITICO also spotted Ignis Energy USA General Manager Pedro Blanquer, Wind Stream Properties co-owner Bob Gates, Assemblymember Esmeralda Soria's field representative Vanessa Barraza and California Wind Energy Association lobbyist Melissa Cortez. Also in attendance were representatives of Clean Power SF, whose agency has committed to purchasing the power for San Franciscans to use, and the state park system, whose land the installation sits on. Rows and rows of turbine blades were being stored on the location, a welcome site to Scout Clean Energy CEO Michael Rucker. When his team heard that the Trump administration would be imposing hefty tariffs, they sped to expedite shipping supplies from India, Germany, and Malaysia. The blades, which were manufactured in Turkey, cleared customs one day before Liberation Day, according to Rucker. 'We were lucky,' he said. — NB BETTER TO BE LUCKY: Warnings that the Trump administration's Forest Service downsizing could hamper wildfire response efforts haven't materialized yet, thanks in part to favorable weather conditions in fire-prone parts of the country. Democratic lawmakers and state officials across the country have warned that the Trump administration is courting disaster by removing about 5,000 Forest Service workers through early retirement and buyout programs, including about 1,600 people with wildland firefighting qualifications. But decent spring and summer rainfall and cooler temperatures across the West have helped contain wildfires, making existing personnel and resources adequate for ongoing response efforts, POLITICO's Jordan Wolman reports. 'He's gotten lucky in a way,' Steve Ellis, a former Forest Service supervisor who now serves as chair of the National Association of Forest Service Retirees, said of Trump. 'You're not really going to look bad until fire gets going and you don't have enough resources.' — AN, JW KEEPING THE TAP FLOWING: California can expect to receive steady Colorado River water supplies for the rest of the year, but the situation is getting dicey. The Interior Department announced Friday that states along the river will continue to get stable supplies, despite the latest projections for the waterway, which show water levels at the two main reservoirs continuing to plummet, POLITICO's Annie Snider reports. New projections show Lake Mead at elevation 1,056 feet at the beginning of 2026 — almost 8 feet lower than it was on New Year's Day 2025 — and Lake Powell at elevation 3,538 feet — 33.5 feet lower than it was on Jan. 1. But the Trump administration left open the possibility of making mid-year changes to how much water gets released from Lake Powell, and potentially also releasing water from other reservoirs upstream in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah and New Mexico. The news comes as the administration warns it could develop its own water-sharing rules for Western states if they can't reach an agreement among themselves. — AN, AS — Former Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter gives Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin's AB 1408 a shoutout in his call to speed up clean energy installations. — A small Napa County town is experimenting with a new microgrid run on batteries and liquid hydrogen. — An invasive swan species is a growing threat to California's wetlands, sparking a debate over whether hunters should be allowed to begin killing the beautiful birds.
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
Chuck Todd slams Biden, says 'his legacy is Donald Trump came back'
Chuck Todd shredded former President Biden on his podcast, arguing he was so "weak and ineffective" it made people go back to President Trump.
The Hill
3 hours ago
- The Hill
Trump could finish Biden's marijuana reform
Trump reportedly told donors this month he was considering rescheduling marijuana, and in a press conference this week confirmed it, saying a decision would come in the 'next few weeks.' Normalizing marijuana use has typically been viewed as a left-wing issue, but Trump has previously expressed support for its regulation and decriminalization. 'I believe it is time to end needless arrests and incarcerations of adults for small amounts of marijuana for personal use. We must also implement smart regulations, while providing access for adults, to safe, tested product,' Trump wrote on Truth Social in September 2024. Trump said he would be voting 'YES' on Florida Amendment 3 last year, which would have legalized recreational cannabis in the state. Despite receiving 55 percent of the vote, the measure failed because it did not garner the required 60 percent supermajority. The Biden administration had sought to reschedule cannabis from Schedule I to the lesser Schedule III but ultimately left the process unfinished. The move would bring negligible changes in criminal justice reform, but significant tax benefits for the industry. Right before the Trump administration assumed office, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Administrative Law Judge John Mulrooney canceled a hearing on the rescheduling proposal after supporters filed an appeal alleging the DEA had colluded with opponents to the effort. According to Adam Smith, executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project, the rescheduling effort by the Biden administration stalled due to a resistant DEA. 'The DEA, culturally and historically, has been against reforming cannabis laws. And I think to some extent that is their natural response is to dig in their heels,' Smith said. Recently confirmed DEA Administrator Terry Cole told senators in April that assessing where in the process marijuana rescheduling stood would be one of his 'first priorities.' Upon being sworn in, Cole omitted cannabis rescheduling from his list of priorities.
