Prostate cancer decisions — 2024

The Board has remanded the case for further development to determine if the Veteran's service-connected disabilities render him in need of regular aid and attendance, specifically addressing his SI joint and iliac crest deformity. The case will also include an addendum opinion from a clinician regarding whether he requires aid and attendance due to these conditions.

The Board has granted service connection for prostate cancer as due to radiation exposure, finding it at least as likely as not related to the Veteran's in-service exposure. The claim was reopened based on new evidence submitted since the last denial.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection for prostate cancer with incontinence and impotence as due to herbicide agent exposure, on bases other than the PACT Act, has been dismissed. The Veteran opted into the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA) system by filing a VA Form 20-0996, Decision Review Request: Higher-Level Review from the December 2023 Supplemental Statement of the Case.

The Veteran's prostate cancer is denied as not related to service.,The Veteran's gallbladder condition is denied as not related to service.,The Veteran's heart condition, diagnosed as congestive heart failure, is granted as related to in-service asbestos exposure.

The Veteran's service connection claims for prostate cancer, right and left upper extremity peripheral neuropathy, and right and left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy are all granted due to presumed exposure to herbicide agents during service near the Korean DMZ.

The Veteran's hepatitis C and related liver disabilities (cirrhosis of the liver and hepatocellular carcinoma) are granted as service-connected.,Prostate cancer is remanded for further review.

The Veteran's TDIU claim is being remanded due to incomplete development and the need for updated VA records, employment history information, and a VA examination.

The Veteran's claims for prostate cancer, bladder cancer, and umbilical hernia are being remanded due to the need for further development regarding service connection. The VA is required to provide a dose estimate based on the Veteran's exposure to ionizing radiation during his active duty as a submarine crew member. Additionally, the Veteran should be provided with a TERA examination to determine if there is a nexus between his current conditions and his in-service exposures.

The Board has remanded the claims of service connection for prostate cancer and respiratory cancer due to insufficient evidence regarding potential exposure to firefighting foam in service.

The Board has granted service connection for Parkinson's disease, prostate cancer, and coronary artery disease based on exposure to herbicide agents during service. The Veteran's cause of death is also recognized as related to these conditions.

The Veteran's claims for service connection are remanded due to the need for additional development and examination, including verification of his reported stressor event and herbicide agent exposure.

The Board has decided that the Veteran's prostate cancer may be related to his exposure to Agent Orange during service, but more evidence is needed to determine this. The case is being sent back for further examination and review.

The Board has remanded the issues of whether the reduction in the evaluation for residuals of prostate cancer from 100 percent to 60 percent was proper and entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 60 percent is improper. The Veteran's private treatment records, including those from Dr. S., who performed his radiation therapy, need to be considered.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate medical opinions and a need for clarification on whether service-connected prostatitis aggravates the Veteran's non-service-connected prostate cancer.

The Veteran's prostate cancer residuals are rated at a 60 percent disability rating since September 25, 2015. The Board also granted TDIU for the entire period from September 25, 2015.

The Board has granted service connection for prostate cancer, finding that the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents during his service in the Republic of Vietnam. The decision is based on presumptive service connection due to exposure to herbicide agents.

The Veteran's appeal for increased ratings for residuals of prostate cancer and erectile dysfunction was denied. The Board found that the Veteran did not have renal dysfunction as a residual of his service-connected prostate cancer, and even if he did, it would not result in a higher rating than what is already assigned.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the Veteran's exposure to herbicide agents during service, and for an addendum opinion on whether his prostate cancer is related to or caused by service.

The Veteran's claims for service connection are remanded due to insufficient verification of his exposure to Agent Orange in Vietnam. The TDIU claim is also remanded as it depends on the outcome of these service connection claims.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for prostate cancer, finding that there is no evidence to support a causal relationship between his current diagnosis and his in-service exposure to asbestos.