Waiting for my Zero Club Entrance Pass

All the good vibes I can muster are headed your way...........good luck for an excellent result.
Bill

NV - we usually talk about a "zero" post surgery in particular as anything undetectable, and definitely below .1. It can vary, and also depends on the accuracy and sensitivity of the test. When they drew my blood at my urologist Monday, they said they were capable of going down to .001. That is more sensitive then all the PSA I did with my GP for 6 years. Your lastest number is excellent! Congrats and welcome.

David in SC

Purgatory
I've seen that <.001ng/mL being posted before (in fact two of my results reported it) but I don't believe that there is equipment available of that capability. Some time back I requested ultra-sensitive tests and they were reported as standard results i.e. <0.1ng/mL. I raised an objection via my G.P. with the pathology lab and the results were re-issued as <0.001mL with an explanation the original result was "misreported". One thing led to another and at the suggestion of another member I investigated further. The most sensitive equipment available today is the "Immulite 2000 Generation 3". It has an absolute lowest detection limit of 0.003 ng/mL so a result of <0.001mL is not technically possible. The absolute lowest reading should say <0.003ng/mL. At these levels the actual number is meaningless but those giving out results should at least know the capabilities of the equipment they are relying on.
Bill

What is an Ultrasensitive PSA Assay?
The analytical sensitivity of an assay (also referred to as the detection limit) is defined as the lowest concentration of the measured analyte that can be distinguished from the zero control. The Yang Pros- Check® and Hybritech Tandem-R® assays, used clinically back in the late 1980s, were the first commercial immunoassays for PSA. These first-generation PSA assays were manually performed radioimmunometric test methods and possessed analytical sensitivities of 0.3 to 0.6 ng/mL.

Using the Yang assay as an example, patient values that were below the detection limit for the assay were reported as < 0.3 ng/mL, but could be anywhere between zero and 0.29 ng/mL. Given the high degree of error for PSA measurements approaching the detection limit of such assays, an accurate, reproducible patient result could not be assured unless the PSA level was as high as 0.6 to 0.8 ng/mL. This higher value is called an assay’s “functional sensitivity,” which is defined as the lowest concentration measurable with an assay where the coefficient of variation is less than 20%.

Second-generation PSA assays were developed in the mid-1990s and offered roughly a 10-fold improvement in analytical sensitivity, with detection limits of 0.03 to 0.07 ng/mL, depending upon the manufacturer’s claims. Automated immunoassay analyzers, which reduce the inherent errors associated with manual testing, also began to be introduced during this same time frame. In order to differentiate these second-generation PSA assays from the less sensitive Pros-Check® and Tandem-R® methods, the terms hypersensitive and ultrasensitive were often used to describe these assays. Although more sensitive from an analytical standpoint, second-generation PSA assays possess a functional sensitivity of 0.1 to 0.2 ng/mL.

The first third-generation PSA assay was introduced into the U.S. market in 1997 by DPC. This assay offers an additional 10-fold improvement in low-end analytical sensitivity, with a claimed detection limit of 0.003 ng/mL, and a functional sensitivity of 0.01 ng/mL. Recognizing the clinical value of third-generation sensitivity, other manufacturers have introduced more sensitive versions of their own PSA tests.

Best of luck today David...

Good luck David....Pete had a PSA last week and we will get report later this week......We know the feeling. Diane