1.3? That's excellent!
jimhoney
> I am age 70/ my PAS Test showed up as 1.3= good or bad ?
c palmer - 11 Mar 2005 13:22 GMT
1.3 i concur with jim.
kick back and enjoy life.
~ curtis
knowledge is power - growing old is mandatory - growing wise is optional
"Many more men die with prostate cancer than of it. Growing old is
invariably fatal. Prostate cancer is only sometimes so."
http://community.webtv.net/PALMER_ENT/doc
> I am age 70/ my PAS Test showed up as 1.3= good or bad ?
My opinion is that at age 70 with a PSA test of 1.3 you are looking
real good.
Just as a caveat - but not as a worry - one test alone does not give
the big picture view that one needs to track their prostate health.
PSA test results also need to viewed over the long term so that a trend
line is developed.
If your trend line has been fairly stable over years of testing then
great but if, just as an example, two years ago it was 0.6 and last
year it was 0.9 and this year it is 1.3 then it would be trending
upward at a rate that needed further study.
PSA velocity (PSAV) and PSA doubling time (PSADT) need to be calculated
as part of your trend details.
I say all this just as a notice to anyone new to PSA testing (I don't
that if that describes you) to know that one test is not usually
sufficient to determine your prostate situation so keep your own PSA
record and track it over time.
Also know that high grade prostate cancer with high Gleason scores
produces less PSA than low grade prostate cancer with lower Gleason
score which is one reason PSA needs to be trackd over time to follow
thw actual PSA score and PSAV & PSADT.
Harold
If that is your first PSA and your DRE was negative, I'd say it was
fantastic. Keep checking it on an annual basis and if it doesn't go up in
the next 30 years, forget about it.

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
> I am age 70/ my PAS Test showed up as 1.3= good or bad ?
Huck...Here are the results of a study of 2,950 men age 60-92 with
PSA<4 ng/ml. The results suggest that the probability of your having
PCa, based on your PSA alone, would be around 17%...Best wishes and
good health, Ron
Prevalence of prostate cancer among men with a prostate-specific
antigen level < or =4.0 ng per milliliter.
Thompson IM, Pauler DK, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, Lucia MS, Parnes HL,
Minasian LM, Ford LG, Lippman SM, Crawford ED, Crowley JJ, Coltman CA
Jr.
N Engl J Med. 2004 May 27;350(22):2239-46
Among the 2950 men (age range, 62 to 91 years), prostate cancer was
diagnosed in 449 (15.2 percent); 67 of these 449 cancers (14.9 percent)
had a Gleason score of 7 or higher. The prevalence of prostate cancer
was 6.6 percent among men with a PSA level of up to 0.5 ng per
milliliter, 10.1 percent among those with values of 0.6 to 1.0 ng per
milliliter, 17.0 percent among those with values of 1.1 to 2.0 ng per
milliliter, 23.9 percent among those with values of 2.1 to 3.0 ng per
milliliter, and 26.9 percent among those with values of 3.1 to 4.0 ng
per milliliter. The prevalence of high-grade cancers increased from
12.5 percent of cancers associated with a PSA level of 0.5 ng per
milliliter or less to 25.0 percent of cancers associated with a PSA
level of 3.1 to 4.0 ng per milliliter