New psa is .02--- worried??

I just got my new 6 month psa. It is .02. I had a davinci radical in 2010 and it has always been reported to me as zero.......anyone else have this rise? Nervous......

Proscapt-- Thanks alot. I did call the doc-- no return call yet. They used to report my psa as<.1 now the result is .02....hmmmm....so maybe you are correct? They changed the way they report it???

Craig,

It could very easily be how they report the data or the lab upgraded to a more sensitive 2 digit machine.
When you get a PSA test done, you should ask for the lab report - not just the number. In fact, all of us should!
The report will tell you the machine used, the protocol used and the reported number.

Also, you should look at your lab request form. There are two boxes in the PSA request form: Screening and Diagnostic
Screening usually is reported to 1 digit.
Diagnostic usually is reported to 2 digits.

You are worried. That is real. So call up and ask. Make some noise.
That minor change in the report might not be important to them but it is very important to you.

Every man, I repeat, Every man who has had a biochemical recurrence after getting perfect zeros, passed through 0.02 on the way there.
Don't let them call you a "worrywart" or throw the blame on you. If they were professional they would have attached a note saying "There is a change in our protocols", or "we changed machines", or "XYZ....

You are the customer and these results matter to you. If they don't take the results seriously then maybe you should consider going someplace or to someone else who treats both the data and you, the patient, with the respect you deserve.

I will get off my soapbox now.
Jeff

Craig, not to worry. If your first PSA read <0.1, that meant they used the "older" PSA test. Your recent test result of 0.02 means that the lab used a newer generation of PSA testing that measures to a further degree. You are good to go at 0.02...remember, the goal is to have a PSA of less than 0.1 and you are well below that. My husband has the same PSA reading and he is 4.5 years out from his surgery.

Congratulations.

The clinic where I go just changed their test so I went from <0.1 to 0.02 on this last go around. I could tell the doc was all ready to calm me down but, thanks to this forum, I understood what was happening and I was effectively 0.

A friend of mine who is a doctor in the lab there told me later that they are considering going back to the old way of reporting because the doctors feel they are spending too much time having to calm men down after their tests.

One thing I learned was that the lab was not rounding the results but truncating them. So, 0.09 was reported no differently then 0.02. Both were <0.1. I might have pulled the SRT trigger a might sooner had I seen steady rises instead of 0,0,0,.1,.1,.2 like I did.

While this is true
"Every man, I repeat, Every man who has had a biochemical recurrence after getting perfect zeros, passed through 0.02 on the way there. "

It is also true that not every man who go a 0.02 had a recurrence.

You need to follow up. I would suggest concern rather than worry at this time.

Post deleted by Putt.  Duplication

<.1 to .02 sounds good to me. Perhaps the ultra sensitive test.

Craig,
0.02 is less than (<) 0.1. It is simply a more technical report giving you an exact figure (perhaps what it has always been) rather than a rounded figure. As 142 said one's PSA when getting a report of >0.1 could be anything from 0.099 down to 0.003 (0.003 is the lowest detection limit of current equipment). You can relax. It is important I feel to always use the same lab (thus the same style of reporting) and know what type of equipment is doing the pathology.
Bill

I mentioned that Ron went from .01 to .09.  The doctor said there was no reason for concern.  He is to come back in THREE months.  Does that sound right?

My hospital lab also got a more sensitive machine in between my last two tests. And I went from <0.1 to <0.01. Doc said that was no indication that my PSA had gone down.
The same machine can test for all kinds of things not just PSA, but on the basis of what they have told me in the past I don't think it will make mich difference to the way they treat guys with PCa, as straight after surgery they said that their protocol was not to consider additional treatment until PSA has risen above 0.2.
The extra info is more about what the machine can do rather than what the docs need to know.
Similarly, I have a set of scales that can weigh to the nearest gram. When it comes to checking my own weight I don't actually need to know if I am 83.998Kg or 84.000Kg, for me the difference between 82Kg and say 85Kg is what may be more relevant, but if I am weighing some mail then the 2gram difference between 19 and 21 grams does make a difference as I need more stamps.

Alf

I looked at that report and did not see the PSA test included. The results were for chemical assays like theophyllin, folate, digitoxin etc. What I found strange was that the machines are calibrated at 24°C (75.2°F) with an operating range of 18° to 30°C (64.4°F to 86.0°F)
Why use such high a temp?

As energy prices increase Labs might try to reduce what they spend on climate control letting the temp rise a bit in summer and fall a bit in winter. That is ok IF they correct the numbers for us.

J

Many labs have changed over to the more sensitive test, accurate to 1/100th of a nanogram (1/100,000,000,000 of a gram per milliliter).  My PSA was always <0.1 ng/mL until the switch to the ultrasensitive PSA.  It's now 0.02.  Nothing to disturb my afternoon nap.