Prostate cancer decisions — 2015

The Board has remanded the case due to the Veteran's request for a videoconference hearing.

The Board found that the Veteran's prostate cancer is not related to his military service, specifically due to a lack of credible evidence supporting exposure to herbicides and no indication of a direct link between service and the condition.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for prostate cancer, claimed as a result of herbicide exposure, is being remanded due to uncertainty regarding his eligibility for the regulatory presumption of herbicide exposure. The AOJ needs to obtain deck logs from the ships he served on during the relevant time period.

The Veteran's death is being reviewed for potential service connection due to exposure to herbicides. The cause of death listed on the amended death certificate was metastatic malignant melanoma, which may be related to herbicide exposure. The appellant contends that prostate and lung cancer are also related to herbicide exposure in service.

The Board has granted service connection for residuals of prostate cancer and assigned a 40 percent disability rating effective June 3, 2013. The Veteran's condition manifests as urinary incontinence requiring the use of absorbent materials more than four times per day.

The Veteran's prostate cancer residuals have been rated at 60 percent since January 7, 2012. Since August 3, 2013, the Veteran has a permanent suprapubic catheter and is now rated at 100 percent under Diagnostic Code 7516.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for prostate cancer is being remanded due to conflicting information regarding the onset of the disability and additional relevant evidence has been added to the record.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of prostate cancer, claimed as due to exposure to herbicides during his military service in Thailand and Vietnam, is being remanded for additional development.

The Veteran's prostate cancer was reduced from 100% to 20% effective June 15, 2011.,The Veteran's prostate cancer was further reduced from 20% to 40% effective February 19, 2013.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for diabetes mellitus, prostate cancer and lung cancer as new and material evidence was not presented to reopen these claims.

The Veteran seeks service connection for prostate cancer and Type II diabetes mellitus due to herbicide exposure. The Board finds that a remand is necessary to verify whether the Veteran's supervisor served with him in Korea, as he asserts.

The Veteran's claims for prostate cancer and erectile dysfunction, both potentially related to herbicide exposure in Thailand, are being remanded due to the need for additional verification of his claimed exposures.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for prostate cancer and its residuals, finding no evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Veteran's prostate cancer is currently rated as 40 percent disabling, effective December 17, 2013. The RO proposed to reduce the rating from 100% to noncompensably disabling in an August 2012 decision, which was implemented in a November 2012 decision. The Veteran disagrees with this reduction and is seeking restoration of his original 100% rating. His claim for increased rating remains on appeal.

The Veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for his prostate cancer residuals is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination and consideration of additional treatment records.

The Veteran's prostate cancer residuals are rated at 60 percent disabling due to voiding dysfunction, but the appeal is denied as there is no evidence of permanent total disability.

The Veteran's prostate cancer and resulting complications, including erectile dysfunction, were not caused by VA treatment or negligence. Therefore, he is denied compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for these conditions.

The Veteran's prostate cancer residuals have been rated as 60 percent disabling under the schedular criteria. The evidence does not meet the requirements for a higher rating based on voiding dysfunction or renal dysfunction.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining medical opinions regarding the Veteran's renal cancer and hypertension. The issues of service connection for prostate cancer, kidney cancer, hypertension, erectile dysfunction, and TDIU are inextricably intertwined with the renal cancer claim.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for prostate cancer, finding that there was no evidence of exposure to herbicides and no medical link between his current condition and his military service.