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 / Prostate Cancer / March 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

psa test ???

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Mark Cleary - 15 Mar 2007 03:14 GMT
I am 46 in July. I had a PSA test in about 11/04 PSA was 2.5.

Then had another in 12/05 PSA was 2.7.

I just had another this month it was 3.2. My research suggest it could be a
problem at my age but seems borderline it terms of numbers. I had a
grandfather who had prostate cancer and died I believe when he was about 60.

Thoughts suggestions
Signature

Mark Cleary
Hollenbeck Jazz Guitars the Finest
Handcarved Jazz Guitars
http://members.cox.net/ruthster/hollenbeck/

Alan Meyer - 15 Mar 2007 04:35 GMT
>I am 46 in July. I had a PSA test in about 11/04 PSA was 2.5.
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Thoughts suggestions

Mark,

I'm not a doctor and am not qualified to give medical advice, but
here are my thoughts on what you're seeing.

The numbers look suspicious to me.  Many doctors still follow
the old guideline that says anything under 4.0 is okay, but in
fact it is now thought that what is "okay" depends on your age.
4.0 is probably fine for a 70 year old man, but probably not for
a 46 year old man.  And rapid growth of PSA is suspicious at any
age.

There are a number of conditions that can cause an elevated PSA.
Prostate cancer is the one that is dangerous.  Others include
"benign prostate hyperplasia" - which is a non-cancerous growth,
bacterial infection, and "prostatitis", which is a general name
for inflammation of the prostate tissue which could be caused by
various things.

I suggest you get a referral to a urologist who can analyze this
for you.  He may want to do a biopsy.  He may want to give you
antibiotics to see if you have a prostate infection.

If he wants to give you antibiotics, I suggest you ask him
if he can do a urine culture instead to check for infection.  I
personally think that speculative use of antibiotics is not in
the best interests either of patients or of society at large.  A
urine culture takes a little more time and trouble than writing a
prescription, but is a lot less invasive and may give more
information.

If he does recommend a biopsy, I suggest you follow the
recommendation and do it.  Ask him what kind of biopsy he does
and come back here to get people's ideas about it.

If you've got cancer, you've almost certainly caught it very
early while it is still highly treatable.

Best of luck.

   Alan
NICK - 15 Mar 2007 05:23 GMT
> 11/04 PSA was 2.5.
> 12/05 PSA was 2.7.
> this month it was 3.2.

> Thoughts suggestions

Could be BPH - a non-cancerous growth.
Could be an infection, although it would be unusual for one to hang
around 2-1/2 years.
Could be prostate cancer.

And I don't think anyone in the group is medically qualified to give
a diagnosis or suggest a treatment.

Who requested the PSA?  Your family doctor?   Or urologist?
Did they perform a DRE (digital rectal exam)?
Did they suggest a biopsy?

Lots of unanswered questions.
I.P. Freely - 15 Mar 2007 06:39 GMT
> Could be an infection, although it would be unusual for one to hang
> around 2-1/2 years.

Not all that unusual. Prostatitis can last for years, even after Cipro
treatment. It often lies dormant following inadequate antibiotic
treatment, and simply re-emerges because it was not eradicated; this was
fairly common before Cipro. If I had an unexplained, prolonged, slightly
elevated PSA and biopsy was negative, I'd ask my docs about a urine
culture.

I.P.
RR - 15 Mar 2007 06:50 GMT
) NOT to panic - you have things under control
2) You can either wait and take another psa test
    in 3-6 moths and then make decisions.
    OR - ease your mind and take a biopsy now and then you know
    one way or another where you stand

Whatever the result - keep monitoring your psa

RR

>I am 46 in July. I had a PSA test in about 11/04 PSA was 2.5.
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
>Thoughts suggestions
Mark Cleary - 15 Mar 2007 12:05 GMT
I have a biopsy scheduled for 04/06 urologist said I did have an enlarged
prostate but no prostitius. He did the rectal exam and ultrsound of bladder.
He said he advice as my brother in law a family dr. Do the biospy to avoid
asking why you did not later.

Signature

Mark Cleary
Hollenbeck Jazz Guitars the Finest
Handcarved Jazz Guitars
http://members.cox.net/ruthster/hollenbeck/

>
> ) NOT to panic - you have things under control
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> >
> >Thoughts suggestions
kh - 15 Mar 2007 12:23 GMT
> I have a biopsy scheduled for 04/06 urologist said I did have an enlarged
> prostate but no prostitius. He did the rectal exam and ultrsound of bladder.
> He said he advice as my brother in law a family dr. Do the biospy to avoid
> asking why you did not later.

There are other non-invasive tests.  The accuracy and sensitivity are
controversial but discuss these with your doc:

Prostascint - two-stage radioisotope scan, new, heavy duty. More
accurate at the top centers, Cleveland and Baltimore are mentioned in
the East.

Radioactive bone scan - not real sensitive but easy.  takes about 3
hours.

PET scan - Positron Emission Tomography, not yet certified for
prostate cancer but the docs will use the result.

Color doppler ultrascan - Depends on the artist reading the scan.

MRI with butt-plug - shows fine structures, tumors, within the
prostate.

I think there are others.  As these do not involve cutting it's worth
considering.

-kh  I've had them all except for the Color doppler ultrascan.
Bill - 15 Mar 2007 15:07 GMT
kh, I don't think ANY of those tests are intended as substitutes for a
properly executed biopsy. The ProstaScint in particular would be a
terrible waste of heathcare dollars for a man presenting w/ a PSA of
3.2. Let's not confuse defensive, rote, or revenue-based medicine w/
good medicine. JMHO.

Bill Denton
RP 2/12/02
PSA 1.6
Memphis
kh - 15 Mar 2007 23:21 GMT
> kh, I don't think ANY of those tests are intended as substitutes for a
> properly executed biopsy. The ProstaScint in particular would be a
> terrible waste of heathcare dollars for a man presenting w/ a PSA of
> 3.2. Let's not confuse defensive, rote, or revenue-based medicine w/
> good medicine. JMHO.

well, I wasn't recommending anything except to raise those
possibilities when talking to the doc.

>From my perspective as a patient, the tests add to the knowledge
base.  Perhaps not much but something.

As for the biopsy, both my business partner and myself had negative
(nothing found) biopsies when it turned out that the cancer was
there.   As a result, I'm not a big fan of biopsies and hearing, "good
news, there wasn't any cancer", when between the two of us, 3 biopsies
missed.   My second and his third found it.   These are not good odds.

Once the docs knew it was there, the MRI with butt-plug, showed them
my tumor.

There have been reports of similar results from the color doppler
ultrascan when read by an expert.

As for cost, if he has good insurance, that's their problem, not
his.   If you're thinking of the "greater good" and what's best for
society, then the more tests he has, the lower the ultimate marginal
cost for the rest of us.

The more they run the Prostascint, the better they get at it.

-kh
Bill - 16 Mar 2007 16:24 GMT
"As for cost, if he has good insurance, that's their problem, not
his.   If you're thinking of the "greater good" and what's best for
society, then the more tests he has, the lower the ultimate marginal
cost for the rest of us."

Yes, I'm thinking of the greater good and that means we shouldn't
waste ANYTHING, even if it's cheap and abundant today. The lower
marginal cost assumes that there are economies of scale and that they
will be passed along; I'm afraid it often doesn't work that way. Part
of the the problem w/ the rising cost of heathcare is that everyone
wants everything regardless of cost. Those costs are passed along in
increased premiums. It has to stop somewhere. I am against any
superfluous or unnecessary tests - period.

"The more they run the Prostascint, the better they get at it."

So you advocate that we via our ins. cos. pay for their training? :-)
Anyway, the limitations of the ProstaScint are not w/ the operators.

Bill Denton
RP 2/12/02
PSA 1.6
Memphis
kh - 16 Mar 2007 19:11 GMT
> So you advocate that we via our ins. cos. pay for their training? :-)
> Anyway, the limitations of the ProstaScint are not w/ the operators.

I don't think it's that clear.  Decades ago, CAT-scans were expensive
and rationed.  They discussed how many should a state allow to be
installed.   Then it was MRI's.

That's not the case now.   A CAT-scan is a walk-in around here and an
MRI is almost that.

You're right in that these are pricey tests and not like, say, an X-
ray or Blood sugar but so were computers, calculators, VCRs, etc.

The more "mass market", the lower the price.

It's worth discussing with Mark's docs.  If they learn something, they
can treat him better.

-kh
Steve Kramer - 15 Mar 2007 12:29 GMT
>I have a biopsy scheduled for 04/06 urologist said I did have an enlarged
> prostate but no prostitius. He did the rectal exam and ultrsound of
> bladder.
> He said he advice as my brother in law a family dr. Do the biospy to avoid
> asking why you did not later.

Well, there you go.

Just relax and wait for the biopsy.

At your age (46 is young) and with your PSA (low) and with an enlarged
prostate (symptom of infection or benign problem),  I'd estimate your
chances of bad news at less that 33%, ...  maybe less than 25%.

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, 5/05, 10/05,
2/06, 6/06
PSA  .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 .145
Casodex added daily 07/06
PSA <0.04, <0.05
Non Illegitimi Carborundum

Steve Kramer - 15 Mar 2007 12:20 GMT
>I am 46 in July. I had a PSA test in about 11/04 PSA was 2.5.
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Thoughts suggestions

In and of itself, it is an indicator that you might want to consult a
urologist and get a digital rectal exam.  A DRE can tell you if your
prostate is enlarged or if it has an palpable nodules.  With that
information, you are armed with enough knowledge to determine if a biopsy is
warranted.

Only a biopsy can determine if you have cancer.  But, there are several
other things it can be and a urologist should be making every effort to find
out what it is.

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, 5/05, 10/05,
2/06, 6/06
PSA  .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 .145
Casodex added daily 07/06
PSA <0.04, <0.05
Non Illegitimi Carborundum

Buttercup's Dad - 15 Mar 2007 12:58 GMT
I would want to know for sure, so would go for the biopsy.  Of course,
even that is not definitive.  There have been guys here that had as
many as three biopsies before the cancer was found.

Did they do a PSA Free?  That would just be another indication of what
may be going on.

Good luck to you Mark.

David S.

> grandfather who had prostate cancer and died I believe when he was about 60.
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Hollenbeck Jazz Guitars the Finest
> Handcarved Jazz Guitarshttp://members.cox.net/ruthster/hollenbeck/
Paul - 15 Mar 2007 16:47 GMT
>I am 46 in July. I had a PSA test in about 11/04 PSA was 2.5.
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
>Thoughts suggestions

Mark,

45 year old male here. Since both my grandfathers died from prostate
cancer and it's in the process of taking my Dad as I type, I've been
going for PSA tests and annual DREs since I was 40. My PSA started at
2.7 had escalated to 3.3 and held until a month or so ago when I
clocked in at 4.7. 30 days of Levaquin brought it back down to 3.6, at
which time my uro recommended a biopsy, which I had performed last
week. I get my results tomorrow.

I'm a newbie here, so I learn every time that I visit this ng. There
are a lot of experienced voices who IMO are extremely helpful and
offer solid comments. For example, out of this thread, I just learned
that if my results come back negative tomorrow, I should ask for a
urine culture.

In my case, even if I'm negative tomorrow, inevitably someday this
will be an issue for me and now is the time to get serious about
educating myself. I'd recommend that you do the same and good luck to
you.
I.P. Freely - 15 Mar 2007 22:10 GMT
> For example, out of this thread, I just learned
> that if my results come back negative tomorrow, I should ask for a
> urine culture.

When I suggested that, my emphasis was on the word, "think", as in I
"think" you should ask *about* a culture. Please don't presume your
doctor is remiss if he says that's useless; he may be right. My more
important message in that discussion is that urinary tact infections --
UTIs -- can linger for years, and could explain an elevated PSA.

OTOH, neither should you presume your doctor is *right* if s/he poo-poos
the idea. It sounds like pretty cheap insurance to me, but then I'm an
engineer, not a doctor.

I.P.
 
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



©2008 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.