Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / February 2005
low PSA, PCa with high Gleason score
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Harold - 18 Feb 2005 19:16 GMT My comments are provided mostly to benefit, I hope, those folks concerned about acquiring PCa or those recently diagnosed. This information is likely known to those of you have have dealt with PCa for some period of time.
I know this subject comes up at times in this forum so below I will describe my circumstances so, if by chance, it is helpful to others concerned about PCa or perhaps just recently diagnosed. In my opinion there may be, amongst the general male population, some degree of comfort if their PSA tests are what some physicians may call "normal". That is less that 4.0.
I strongly urge all males 40 years and older (35 years if family history of PCa) to have annual PSA's & DRE's and then keep your own record of the results. Ask your physician for a copy of PSA lab test result and his DRE finding.
while the actual PSA result is important to know what else to look for is an upward movement in the results over time.
There is a general rule of thumb that if the PSA velocity (PSAV) is more that .75 ng/ml per year further investigation to rule out PCa is advisable. I agree with that. BUT also important is the PSA doubling time (PSADT) which is a measurement in months (or years) that it is taking your PSA to double in value. A PSADT less that 12 years is deemed to be suitable for further PCa evaluation.
My case: ...............PSA.......DRE May...1993.....0.4......Normal per family Internal Medicine M.D. July..1994.....0.6......Normal per " May...1995.....0.6......Normal per " May...1996.....0.7......Normal per " Aug...1997.....0.8......Normal per " Mar...1998.....0.9......Normal per Urologist Mar...1999.....0.9......not done - at least I do not believe it was. Jan...2001.....3.9......Normal-but likely missed by M.D. in my opinion. June..2001.....3.8......"Big, Ugly" nodule on prostate
Biopsy results: Gleason 4+4=8 5 of 9 biopsy cores positive for cancer. % cancer in 5 cores was 50,70,80,90 & 100%. Biopsy indicated peroneural invasion was present. DNA ploidy was diploid per Dianon Systems.
Now a look at the 7 year pre-2001 historical PSA results will show a low score - below 1.0 for 7 years. The PSA velocity was about 0.10 - well below the 0.75 deemed to be a red flag level.
However the PSA doubling time was a fairly fast 5.1 years and much faster that the 12 years deemed to be a red flag level.
My medical oncologist treating my case says that, in his opinon, even when my PSA was at 0.9 that PCa likely existed and tests should have been done to rule in or rule out PCa based on a PSADT of 5.1 years. Unfortunately that was not done at that time.
However during my years of innocence, before 2001, whilst I did have some awareness of PSAV I was not aware of PSADT and neither were my physicians, I think.
Of course there is more to the story but I'll stop here. A final closing comment is that just because someone has M.D. after their names they are not necessarily - and most likely not - very knowledgeable about PCa. Soak up as much knowledge as you can then question , yes, challenge, yes, demand that your doctor be very good in treating PCa. If he/she is not then fire them and find someone who is.
Stephen Jordan - 18 Feb 2005 19:29 GMT (snip tale of medical ineptitude)
> > Of course there is more to the story but I'll stop here. A final [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > challenge, yes, demand that your doctor be very good in treating PCa. > If he/she is not then fire them and find someone who is. As may be known, I fired my rad onc about two weeks ago because he was ignorant of certain aspects of PCa treatment that were outside his specialty. He put me at risk, which I discovered on my own.
Then, he refused to read an analysis of my case by Stephen B. Strum, who should be known at least by reputation to all here.
Overboard he went. I don't have to put up with crap, and I won't.
Regards,
Steve J __ "'MD' does not mean 'Medical Deity.'" -- Stephen B. Strum, MD
Steve Kramer - 20 Feb 2005 12:28 GMT > Overboard he went. I don't have to put up with crap, and I won't. I read these and thank God I got a good uro right up front. I would not have had nearly the wherewithal to even question my uro, let alone fire him, at that time in my life.
 Signature PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46 Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3bN0M0 Seminal Vesicle involvement, Neg margins PSA .1 .1 .1 .27 .37 .75 EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 (4 mo), 12/03, 4/04, 09/04, 01/05 PSA .07 .05 .06 .05
non Illegitimi carborundum
keith340@webtv.net - 18 Feb 2005 19:52 GMT Harold you have hit the nail on the head...the age of innoncence or lack of pca knowledge sould be over for both docs and patients...I was at my monthly local pca support group meeting this past week and the same topic was discussed...my local group consists of men whom have had all treatment types and the speakers are usually docs from all treatment types...the general consensus of the group is that ignorance about pca is still bliss on both sides..."keep pca awaress alive"
Keith Lundy/So. California 40 Proton Beam Radiation Treatments Loma Linda Univ.Med Ctr..3/03-5/03
Leonard Evens - 18 Feb 2005 21:48 GMT > My comments are provided mostly to benefit, I hope, those folks > concerned about acquiring PCa or those recently diagnosed. This [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > some awareness of PSAV I was not aware of PSADT and neither were my > physicians, I think. I was aware of PSA velocity, and in fact that is how my prostate cancer was found---by me, not by my primary care physician. But I wasn't aware of the doubling time rule when used to detect early prostate cancer. Do you have a reference handy?
You are certainly right that you can't always trust even a good doctor. These days managed care puts a lot of pressure on doctors not to spend to much time on any case, and often they won't look at the patient's history if test results look "normal". In my case, it was a bit subtle, and my doctor did notice it was over 4.0 and suggested another test in a couple of months. But he had completely forgotten about the PSA velocity issue despite the fact we had discussed it previously. I had to bring it to his attention and then he referred me to a urologist, who of course knew all about it. But in your case, that sudden jump to 3.9 should have been a red flag.
> Of course there is more to the story but I'll stop here. A final > closing comment is that just because someone has M.D. after their names > they are not necessarily - and most likely not - very knowledgeable > about PCa. Soak up as much knowledge as you can then question , yes, > challenge, yes, demand that your doctor be very good in treating PCa. > If he/she is not then fire them and find someone who is. Harold - 18 Feb 2005 22:53 GMT > I was aware of PSA velocity, and in fact that is how my prostate cancer > was found---by me, not by my primary care physician. But I wasn't aware > of the doubling time rule when used to detect early prostate cancer. Do > you have a reference handy? My response to Leonard and to all
There are numerous articles available about PSA Doubling Times and the easiest way to find them is a Google search for: PSA Doubling Times
There are also several references to PSA doubling times in Dr. Strum's "A Primer on Prostate Cancer and page references can be found in the index.
For various PCa nomograms including a calculator for finding your doubling time rate can be found at:
www.mskcc.org/mskc/html/10088.cfm
click on: Calculate your treatment choices with our nomogram
It requires Macromedia Flash 6.0 to utilize nomograms.
Also there is a PSADT calculator at:
http://kevin.phys.unm.edu/psa/
Every man needs to maintain a clear record on what is his PSA, PSA velocity and PSA doubling time and, of course, his DRE findings.
If your PSA is increasing, even just a bit, and your PSA velocity is increasing and / or your PSA doubling time is decreasing then locate a very good physician skilled in the fine art of PCa treatment and tell him you want your PSA values to be thoroughly investigated.
A comment on biopsy. In my opinion it sounds worse that it is. Obviously the idea of a physician, and likely an assistant to help, sticking an ultasound wand into your rectum then firing needles through your colon into your prostate will bring sweat to the brow of the toughest man around. At least in my case, there was a brief sting followed by another slightly more noticeable sting but it was less than I imagined and after it was done I got up, walked out and drove home. Not a big deal.
If a biopsy can help detect PCa at an earlier stage, when it is more treatable, don't put it off out of fear of the process. Real fear sets in when you find out A BIT LATE that you have PCa and then anger sets in when you realize you could have detected it earler but were afraid to do so.
Stephen Jordan - 18 Feb 2005 23:47 GMT On February 18, Harold wrote, in pertinent part:
> A comment on biopsy. In my opinion it sounds worse that it is. > Obviously the idea of a physician, and likely an assistant to help, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I imagined and after it was done I got up, walked out and drove home. > Not a big deal. If a patient is concerned about the pain, and there can be pain, request anasthesia. It's the patient's right.
> If a biopsy can help detect PCa at an earlier stage, when it is more > treatable, don't put it off out of fear of the process. Real fear sets > in when you find out A BIT LATE that you have PCa and then anger sets > in when you realize you could have detected it earler but were afraid > to do so. Bingo. Especially the words, "real fear" and "A BIT LATE."
Regards,
Steve J __ "Natural laws have no pity." --Lazarus Long
|
|
|