Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Arthritis / December 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Men's Health - PSA

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
firechief - 23 Dec 2004 06:03 GMT
Men's Health Center - Issues Including Male Sexual Health

December 22, 2004

Men's Health

PSA - It's the Rate of Increase That Counts

Summarized by Robert W. Griffith, MD
September 3, 2004

Introduction
Doubt has been thrown recently on the value of prostate
specific antigen (PSA) tests in diagnosing prostate cancer.
Some men have raised values but have no cancer, or only an
extremely slow-growing one, while others have values below
4 ng/mL and still have prostate cancer. What's to be done?
'Watchful waiting' has been advocated for some men who have
localized prostate cancer when it's agreed that the likely
benefits of treatment are outweighed by the adverse effects
of that treatment. The decision may be helped by a new
analysis of repeated PSA determinations.

The report published in the New England Journal of Medicine
is summarized here.

What was done?
Most men with prostate cancer have a non-palpable tumor,
and are diagnosed as possible cancer by a raised PSA level.
This study was planned to see whether the rate of rise in
the PSA during the year before diagnosis, the PSA level at
diagnosis, the Gleason score (a way of expressing the
severity of the cancer on microscopy) and the tumor stage
could identify those men at risk of death from prostate
cancer.

This sort of information was available for 1804 men treated
by radical prostatectomy at the Barnes-Jewish Hospital in St
Louis from January 1989 to June 2004. After exclusion of
those who were found to have lymph node metastases, those
who received radiotherapy, and those who had only one PSA
level determination before surgery, there were 1095 men
left for evaluation in the study. Their average age was 65,
and their average PSA was 4.3 ng/mL.

Clinical tumor staging was done pre-operatively, and Gleason
scores were assigned on prostate biopsy and prostatectomy
specimens.  Follow-up lasted, on average, for 5 years after
prostatectomy.

During this time PSA levels were measured every 6 months and
digital rectal exams every year. The PSA values were used to
calculate the rate of PSA increase during the year before
diagnosis. The rates were compared with the lymph-node
status, the clinical stage, the Gleason scores, the time
to recurrence, death from prostate cancer, and death from
any cause.

What was found
There were no changes in the time to recurrence, death from
prostate cancer, or death from any cause when the rate of
PSA increase was below 2.0 ng/mL per year. However, at rates
above 2.0 ng/mL there was a significant increase in all
three of these 'endpoints'.  In addition, a PSA increase
rate of more than 2.0 ng/mL per year was linked to lymph
node metastases, a higher clinical stage and a higher
Gleason score, when compared with lower rates.

What does this mean?
Men with a PSA that increases at more than 2.0 ng/mL a
year who are otherwise healthy should consider radical
prostatectomy along with some form of anti-hormonal
therapy. Watchful waiting is not a particularly good
option for these men.

In men who have had a prostatectomy, different guidelines
apply; if there is a doubling of the PSA within a given
period - 3 to 10 months, according to different authorities
- the prognosis is significantly worse.1

There have been recent reports suggesting that a PSA below
4.0 ng/mL is no longer a 'safe' level, carrying no risk of
prostate cancer. The response to these new findings should
be: have an annual check-up by your physician from 55
onwards, making sure it includes a digital rectal exam and
a PSA test. If the level is above 4.0 ng/mL or it has
increased 2.0 ng/mL over the previous year's value, have
further investigations done by a qualified urologist.

Source
Preoperative PSA velocity and the risk of death from
prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy.
AV. D'Amico, M-H. Chen, KA. Roehl, WJ. Catalona,
N Engl J Med, 2004, vol. 351, pp. 125--135

Footnotes
1. Progress toward identifying aggressive prostate cancer.
M. Eisenberger, A. Partin, Editorial. N Engl J Med, 2004,
vol. 351, pp. 180--181
Gaetan Michiels - 23 Dec 2004 08:38 GMT
Wath is a DIGITAL rectal exam???
Wil

> Men's Health Center - Issues Including Male Sexual Health
>
[quoted text clipped - 95 lines]
>  M. Eisenberger, A. Partin, Editorial. N Engl J Med, 2004,
>  vol. 351, pp. 180--181
Tina Underwood - 23 Dec 2004 14:29 GMT
>Wath is a DIGITAL rectal exam???

Digital...digit....as in finger....<g>

~KJ
janers - 23 Dec 2004 15:45 GMT
>Wath is a DIGITAL rectal exam???

Digital...digit....as in finger....<g>

and rectal..... as in a..,
or to be more specific butt hole

hehe
well someone had to type it

janers
Kelly Cobb - 23 Dec 2004 15:23 GMT
Thanks, Joe...I've printed this to share with my boss...he's only 48 and has
had a PSA ranging from 4-8 for a few years now. His doctor seems to like the
'wait and see' method of treatment, though he has ordered 3 separate
biopsies, which found nothing. He just finished a 2 week antibiotic regimen
which lowered his PSA to just under 6 and is now waiting for the next thing.

Kelly C.

> Men's Health Center - Issues Including Male Sexual Health
>
[quoted text clipped - 95 lines]
>  M. Eisenberger, A. Partin, Editorial. N Engl J Med, 2004,
>  vol. 351, pp. 180--181
firechief - 23 Dec 2004 16:52 GMT
> Thanks, Joe...I've printed this to share with my boss...he's only 48 and has
> had a PSA ranging from 4-8 for a few years now. His doctor seems to like
> the 'wait and see' method of treatment, though he has ordered 3 separate
> biopsies, which found nothing. He just finished a 2 week antibiotic regimen
> which lowered his PSA to just under 6 and is now waiting for the next thing.

I had two PSA readings of 10.1 and 11.0, each with biopsies that
resulted in mid-range Gleason ratings.  And the doctor at a cancer
center where radiation was scheduled stated he "felt it" during a
digital exam (fall 2002).

Then all of a sudden the PSA readings dropped to the low 5's and
low 6's, and the urologist said "It may have been a virus."   Now I'm
having PSA tests every 6 months using the "wait and see" method.

Now I'm happy that they screwed up the appointment schedule and
I walked out of the place before any treatment.  Especially after they
showed their true face and billed Medicare and TriCare for three
appointments/treatments that I never made and never attended.
diclidophora@yahoo.co.uk - 23 Dec 2004 17:12 GMT
Mostly we don't get PSA test in the U.K. The general attitude of medics
seems to be that the test is not reliable enough. However, inability to
access the test seems to have resulted in some (?many) people not
having prostate cancer diagnosed at and early stage.

Like many health issues here the truth may lie in the fact that
additional expense would be incurred by the NHS if tests were available
to patients on demand. Even so, there is a movement pushing to start
screening men.

Peter
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.