I am 47 years old I have an enlarged prostate normal for a 65 year
old. My psa is 2.2 my uro retook my psa and said if it does not come
in below 2 he strongly recommends a biopsy. This seems a bit
agressive. What about checking the free psa? If my psa is on the high
side it is likely because my prostate is on the large side. Does
anyone have an opinion? Thank you.
Ed - 24 Oct 2008 04:14 GMT
>I am 47 years old I have an enlarged prostate normal for a 65 year
>old. My psa is 2.2 my uro retook my psa and said if it does not come
>in below 2 he strongly recommends a biopsy. This seems a bit
>agressive. What about checking the free psa? If my psa is on the high
>side it is likely because my prostate is on the large side. Does
>anyone have an opinion? Thank you.
You should probably have it done if your uro recommends it. It is not
a pleasant thing to have done, but it does not hurt very much and
might save your life. After your first one, your uro might recommend
having more done, spaced at some logical interval, to watch for
trends. PSA is not that specific a test for cancer... but trends tell
a better story.
The ultrasound-guided biopsy gives a pretty good value for the size of
the prostate, and that allows the uro to calculate the PSA density
(PSA per volume). If the PSA density trends up, that is a sign of
trouble.
You may be right about the PSA being high because the prostate is
large, but what if you are wrong?
What history of cancer is there in the family? The uro knows this
(presumably) and is in the best position to make a good
recommendation.
Ed
lmac - 24 Oct 2008 04:18 GMT
> I am 47 years old I have an enlarged prostate normal for a 65 year
> old. My psa is 2.2 my uro retook my psa and said if it does not come
> in below 2 he strongly recommends a biopsy. This seems a bit
> agressive. What about checking the free psa? If my psa is on the high
> side it is likely because my prostate is on the large side. Does
> anyone have an opinion? Thank you.
I'd not switch tests. I stick with the same
test and the same lab on a year-to-year basis
and look at my changes, not the absolute values.
Personal opinion: Were I 47, "strongly," would
be my operative word. I'd lay off any activity
that raises psa (sex, prostatic-massage, etc.)
for a week. Then go for another psa.
If the results hadn't improved, I'd treat this
like any other invasive procedure:
1- Ask your doc to state the possible hazards
from the biopsy procedure and what the odds are
of their occurrence.
2- Ask your doc how many prostate biopsies he's
performed and what kind of adverse outcomes have
been experienced by his/her patients.
3- Ask your doc how much your lifespan and
quality of life would be affected by PCa.
Weigh the costs and benefits and decide.
...lmac
DerekF - 24 Oct 2008 10:46 GMT
>I am 47 years old I have an enlarged prostate normal for a 65 year
> old. My psa is 2.2 my uro retook my psa and said if it does not come
> in below 2 he strongly recommends a biopsy. This seems a bit
> agressive. What about checking the free psa? If my psa is on the high
> side it is likely because my prostate is on the large side. Does
> anyone have an opinion? Thank you.
Seems a bit extreme with a PSA of 2.2. Have you had the Free PSA test and
what other tests/exams have you had?
Even after my PVP in 2005 my PSA is still around the 6.0 mark. In the
preceding 10 years it rose from 5.2 to 9.6 with three negative biopsies in
the earlier part of the decade. As my doctor at the time said big prostate
high PSA as it went from 35gm to 75gm.
http://www.prostatecancertreatment.co.uk/current-research/when-to-biopsy/
http://www.malecare.com/prostate-cancer_77.htm
Derek.
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------
fwh1@westchestergov.com - 26 Oct 2008 16:44 GMT
I have to agree with Ed. It's too important not to have the biopsy
done. I had a few biopsies done before I had to have surgery for BPH
and yes, size alone will raise the PSA.
Fred
DerekF - 26 Oct 2008 19:05 GMT
> I have to agree with Ed. It's too important not to have the biopsy
> done. I had a few biopsies done before I had to have surgery for BPH
> and yes, size alone will raise the PSA.
>
> Fred
Something that I quoted here years ago that made some people irate. When I
had my last biopsy in the Day Surgery Unit a passing urologist stooped to
chat. When I said that I was there for a biopsy he replied "PSA Terrorism"
and quoted some Norwegian stats on the number of unnecessary biopsies
performed because of PSA readings..
Derek.
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------
RickMerrill - 15 Nov 2008 20:05 GMT
>> I have to agree with Ed. It's too important not to have the biopsy
>> done. I had a few biopsies done before I had to have surgery for BPH
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
> -----------------
Fat men have high psa too: http://bcbsma.medscape.com/viewarticle/565345_1
PSA isn't the only thing:
http://www.psa-rising.com/blog/?p=91/#content
Prostate Cancer Screening » PSA Rising Prostate Cancer Blog