Prostate cancer decisions — 2015

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for updated assessments of his service-connected prostate cancer residuals.

The Veteran's prostate cancer was not incurred or aggravated by service, including exposure to ionizing radiation. The claim is denied.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development regarding the Veteran's exposure to Agent Orange during his reserve duty at Fort Drum in 1968, and to determine if he is entitled to service connection for heart disability and prostate cancer as secondary to such exposure.

The Veteran's service connection claims for Type II diabetes mellitus and prostate cancer have been granted due to presumed exposure to herbicides during his military service. His PTSD claim is also granted, but at a lower initial rating of 30 percent.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate rationale in a previous opinion regarding service connection for prostate cancer. The Under Secretary for Benefits or the C&P Director acting as a proxy must obtain new opinions that consider and discuss all 6 factors outlined in 38 C.F.R. § 3.311(e).

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including scheduling a VA examination to address the relationship between his claimed conditions and service.

The Veteran's claim for an initial compensable evaluation for his service-connected prostate cancer residuals, status post total prostatectomy, is being remanded due to the need for a VA examination and additional medical records.

The Board found that the reduction of the ratings for prostate cancer residuals and discontinuation of SMC under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1114(s) for housebound benefits were proper based on the evidence at the time.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete records and a need for an etiological opinion regarding the Veteran's prostate cancer and diabetes.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for hypertension and prostate cancer, finding that there was no evidence of these conditions during service or within one year after separation. The Veteran's assertions regarding exposure to smoke and fumes were not supported by contemporaneous medical records.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the inconsistency within the January 2013 VA examination report regarding whether his prostate cancer is in remission or has recurrent disease with a rising PSA level. The RO must obtain an addendum opinion from the examiner.

The Veteran is granted an effective date of January 1, 2006 for the award of a total disability rating due to individual unemployability (TDIU). The claim was pending since March 15, 2005.

The Veteran's service connection claim for prostate cancer is granted as his diagnosis of prostate cancer and Vietnam-era service are supported by the evidence, and he was exposed to herbicides in Vietnam.

The Veteran's claims for prostate cancer and erectile dysfunction are being remanded due to insufficient development regarding exposure to herbicides during service. The AOJ is instructed to conduct further development as outlined in the decision.

The Veteran's prostate cancer and squamous cell carcinoma of the left vocal cord are not service-connected as they were not incurred or aggravated during his active duty service.,Bladder cancer is also not service-connected, as it has been claimed as secondary to a nonservice-connected condition (prostate cancer).

The Veteran's residuals of prostate cancer disability manifested symptoms including nocturia two times per night and occasional urinary blockage during the period from July 26, 2006 to August 22, 2007. The evidence did not show or more nearly approximate any of the symptoms required for a higher initial rating under Diagnostic Code 7528.

The Board has granted service connection for coronary artery disease and prostate cancer, both presumed to be related to herbicide exposure. The Veteran's hypertension and breast enlargement/tenderness are being remanded for further examination and opinion.

The Board denied service connection for ischemic heart disease and prostate cancer, finding no evidence of herbicide exposure in Guam or Vietnam. The Veteran's claims were based on direct service connection rather than the Agent Orange presumption.

The Veteran died from metastatic bladder cancer and prostate cancer, presumed to be related to Agent Orange exposure. However, the medical evidence does not support a service connection for these conditions, as there is no diagnosis of prostate cancer and the cause of death was due to smoking-related bladder cancer.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for prostate cancer, finding that there was no credible evidence of herbicide exposure in Vietnam and thus no basis to grant presumptive service connection. The Board also found that the Veteran did not have 'service in the Republic of Vietnam' as required by VA regulations for presumptive service connection.