A little climb in post-surgery PSA

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Aldeb - 11 Apr 2005 04:00 GMT

Hello all, It has been ages since I posted. My husband Allen just had his
second PSA test taken. This time his regular doctor took it, versus his
urologist. In his original post-surgical (surgery August 2004) PSA he was
at .04 (great news!) He just had another test and the results were .1
Should I be scared? He had a protatectomy with capsular penetration but
clear margins. Presurgery PSA was 8, and he was a 3+7 The literature all
says that less than .1 is undetectable which makes me wonder if .1 is the
beginning of detectable. What do you think?

Reply to this Message

Unquestionably Confused - 11 Apr 2005 04:13 GMT

> Hello all, It has been ages since I posted. My husband Allen just had his
> second PSA test taken. This time his regular doctor took it, versus his
> urologist. In his original post-surgical (surgery August 2004) PSA he was
> at .04 (great news!) He just had another test and the results were .1

The difference likely comes from two different tests (different labs)
and any comparison of the two is comparing apples and oranges.

> Should I be scared? He had a protatectomy with capsular penetration but
> clear margins. Presurgery PSA was 8, and he was a 3+7 The literature all
> says that less than .1 is undetectable which makes me wonder if .1 is the
> beginning of detectable. What do you think?

I think that you're probably not reading the test results correctly. Do
you have a copy of the results? If not, ask the doctor for a copy of
the actual printout.

I would be willing to be that the FIRST post-op PSA result

was: <0.04ng/ml and the second one, by his GP was actually:

<0.10ng/ml.

That little "<" in front of the results means LESS THAN and indicates
that given the level of detectability of that particular test, there is
no sign of PSA or, undetectable.

The first test was a hyper-sensitive PSA test and the level of
detectability is much lower than the current one.

My urologist switched labs since I had my RRP five years ago. Formerly,
the lab results all came back <0.03ng/ml, now they come back <0.10ng/ml.
Works for me<g>

Not to worry until you see a trend such as 0.1 0.17 0.23 etc.

Relax! It's easier for me to say with some time behind me and good
tests. I was nervous as a long-tailed cat in a room full of rocking
chairs for the first couple years when I had to wait out the results of
my quarterly PSA tests. This too shall pass!

Reply to this Message

Aldeb - 12 Apr 2005 04:18 GMT

Thank Heavens for this board! Unquestionably confused was absolutely
right, there was a < in front of the .1! I feel so relieved. It is
definitely a different lab, so I imagine this will be the level of report
in the future. I can sleep better now! Thanks to all of you for the
words of reassurance!!!

Debbie

Reply to this Message

Steve Kramer - 11 Apr 2005 11:23 GMT

Hi, Debbie. Good to hear from you again.

If you went to a different doctor for this PSA, did he also go to a
different lab? I suspect he did. Different labs have different (some more
sensitive) equipment. Some will report PSA to the hundredths and some even
to the thousandths. It is very possible that the lab your regular doctor
uses is does not have as the newer equipment.

That doesn't mean you have to quit them. It only means that Allen's next
PSA is going to have to be compared to this one.

If this is the case, his 0.04 at one lab may be equal to 0.1 at the other.

Bottom line is, don't worry about it. Not yet.

Signature

PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46
Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c
RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 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

> Hello all, It has been ages since I posted. My husband Allen just had his
> second PSA test taken. This time his regular doctor took it, versus his
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> says that less than .1 is undetectable which makes me wonder if .1 is the
> beginning of detectable. What do you think?

Reply to this Message

ronju99 - 11 Apr 2005 11:50 GMT

Hi Deb,
Don't worry about any .1 results. I've had two .1's over the last two
years of testing and continue to have test afterwards of <.1. I believe
for what ever reason the reports are unintentionally omitting the caret <
from the report. If you should have a result greater than .1 then it might
indicate a possible recurrence.
Ron S

Reply to this Message

Glassman - 11 Apr 2005 23:59 GMT

First thing you need to do is make sure your uro gets the test result. My
guess is that he'll order another one soon to keep an eye on it. It could be
nothing, but certainly should be taken seriously as a possible sign of
radiation needed. Good luck!

Signature

JK Sinrod
Sinrod Stained Glass Studios
www.sinrodstudios.com
Coney Island Memories
www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories

Reply to this Message