Two questions: Bactrim DS... *and* PSA > PSA-f

First: Found new doctor who did a full exam including a DRE and said everything appeared perfectly normal. The doctor prescribed Bactrim DS to deal with any possible infection that could be causing the inflammation. Naturally, I hope he is right. Does anyone have any experience wit this?

Second: After the dose is completed he will do a standard PSA test and await the results. My understanding is that if the PSA is 2.5-10 a PSA-f (free PSA) will be done. However, if the PSA is over 10, a PSA-f will NOT be done. Can anyone tell me why that is?

If anyone can add or recommend anything, I'd be very interested in hearing your thoughts.

Thanks for reading.

cooper,

I appreciate your reply here and in my previous thread.

I'm trying (hard) to push things in this direction. But people are so easily swayed by the "normal SOP" They plug you into their flowchart and where you fall is where you fall. There is no longer (or little) any kind of personal one-on-one diagnosis going on. You're just a number on an insurance card. Sad.

I've been trying to gently push my father into vigilantly researching the doctor(s), etc. and have repeatedly told him to seek out Doctors like Dr. Lee -- he found a "new" doctor -- from the sounds of it, he is better than the last, but IMHO not progressive to the point of the Dr. Lee.

All I know, if it was my prostate, I would be following a course of action very much like what your husband did.

My mother was a nurse so she already has the "mindset" that you just do what the doctor says and that's that. So it's a gentle battle of being "nice" and trying to direct him toward what is the best care. But sadly, as is often the case, the children are the idiots and get just a smile-and-nod. Sort of sad since we're the ones that are looking at it objectively.

I've told him several times about the "Invasion of the Prostate Snatchers" book -- and to my knowledge, still hasn't been bought or read.

Oh well -- you can lead a horse to water, eh?

Again, thanks! :)

Although I do not know for certain, I suspect the answer to your question is (1) fpsa is used to help determine whether to do a biopsy; (2) fpsa has not been determined to be reliable where total psa is below 2.5 ng/ml; and (3) with total psa > 10 ng/ml, most docs would suggest a biopsy regardless of fpsa (in which case the fpsa result would not be useful). But I'm no doctor (and I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn Express...)