HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

Latest PSA Results- received today

Support Forums
>
Prostate Cancer
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 6/29/2011 3:58 PM (GMT 0)
Well, another mystery to add to the string. Next tests 09/11, 10/11


Family Doc. Urologist
10/07 .04 10/07 .04
04/08 ..008 02/08 .04
10/08 .02 06/08 .04
05/09 .03 12/08 .04
10/09 .04 06/09 .04
04/10 .06 03/10 .06
08/10 .09 09/10 .09
12/10 .09 02/11 .08
05/11 .08 06/11 .12 (note: first time using this lab, Uro's in house lab)
Posted 6/29/2011 5:29 PM (GMT 0)
James can you request a retest at the old lab? If I was going on raw numbers it is possible that you have enough data to start planning the next steps. But by changing labs here it kinda just put's things on hole while you retest a few months.

Not a favorite plan of mine. Your doubling rate appears very slow. These are cases from what I understand that do well with salvage therapies...

Tony
Posted 6/29/2011 6:40 PM (GMT 0)
Tony, I will be getting another test in Sept. then Oct. The radiation Onco. doesn't want to start anything until the second above .2 anyway. He wants to make sure there really is a return. He likes to avoid causing more damage unless it is demonstrated that cancer has returned. I'm gonna see if I can get another doc to look at it, either on P2P or locally. As it is, it's so slow rising, if it is a reoccurance it will be next year before I reach that point.
Posted 6/29/2011 6:52 PM (GMT 0)
That's not the direction we were hoping for, just when I thought you were in the clear. Definitely need another reading or two before deciding.
Posted 6/29/2011 7:40 PM (GMT 0)
James, Sorry about the rise in your PSA. You have been undetectable for so long that I thought you were in the clear. I hope that tis rise is due to the lab.
Posted 6/29/2011 7:55 PM (GMT 0)
James - difficult to draw conclusions when it's a different lab, but sorry you have this slow rising.
Alf
Posted 6/29/2011 8:04 PM (GMT 0)
James, have you read the online article in PAACT entitled 'URORAD'? JMO but it seems important to use the same lab for each PSA test. Dr. Strum, amongst others, say that because some use different testing methods. I'm just saying.
Posted 6/29/2011 8:25 PM (GMT 0)
David, hope you get more readings too. Dr. Snuffy Myers and Dr. Walsh seem to think that doubling time is important. Still reading all that I can.

Post SRT PSA: 1/10 .12, 4/8 .04, 8/6 .06, 2/11 1.24, 4/11 3.81, 6/11 5.8

Posted 6/29/2011 8:40 PM (GMT 0)
Sorry to hear about the rise. It could be the new machine but I know you are preparing for the potential recurrence. I was hoping you were in the clear. It is amazing how we talk about gleason scores and recurrence comes about in low and high gleason scores. Good luck to you. I guess that why cancer is cancer. There is no good cancer.
Posted 6/29/2011 8:44 PM (GMT 0)
James,

Remember there have been a couple of guys that have gone above .1 and then back down.  Although you had a "possible positive margin"  this might not be the same for you.  All you can do is watch.  If you do experience BCR I would not consider you a "reccurence" based on your positive margin.  You just needed to continue with treatment.  SRT should take care of it for you once and for all.....

Posted 6/29/2011 9:53 PM (GMT 0)
Thanks for the comments, guys. I will still have the tried and (hopefully) true family doctors readings in Sept. and a repeat of the Uro new labs testing in Oct., so I think I still have a comparison that will be valid. The new lab isn't something I have control over, the lab the Uro used before is closed now. As far as planning, I've already consulted and the paperwork is done so when it reaches the point to start, it will be just say so and go. I am not so eager to begin soon, as I have had a really good result from the surgery, as far as continence, and don't want to risk it on what may or may not result from early intervention. As it is, there's still no valid evidence of a return. I realize some Rad. guys would recommend beginning early treatment, but just as many or more say wait, so who you gonna follow? I prefer the later but definite to the earlier and possible.
Posted 6/29/2011 9:59 PM (GMT 0)
Hi James,
Can you by looking at the last lab report tell if the PSA used by the new lab is the same as the assay used by the old lab? If the assays are different a 0.04 variance is very possible. In any case it was just a thought...

RalphV
Posted 6/29/2011 10:29 PM (GMT 0)
Ralph, I should, it is in the mail now. I'll check and see.
Posted 6/29/2011 11:16 PM (GMT 0)
James, sorry to hear your latest news. Whatever doubts you may have about the assay or the lab, the latest PSA is consistent with your previous trend which shows a doubling time of a year or a little over. If that trend continues, you will be looking at 0.2 in a year's time.

In the meantime, do you sit and do nothing, or do you try some of the alternative treatments that we discuss in here from time to time? Good luck with whatever you decide...
Posted 6/30/2011 12:46 AM (GMT 0)
James:
sorry about the rise in numbers - but then I am wary with the change of labs.
-with my bone density tests I had to start a two year study from scratch - and with my PSA - change in numbers but still in zero range...didn't get better numbers after all?
-would expect you to have definitive sequence after the next two readings -
-wishing you the best.
hugs,
BRONSON
Posted 6/30/2011 1:00 AM (GMT 0)
James,

I am in the "different lab" boat as well. Bostwick and my "big, huge, national insurance company" (but you'll remember I told who it was at gfmph) came to an abrupt parting of the ways. So my .09 with a repeat lab was bad enough, then topped off by the same lab going from <0.01 in July 10 to 0.2 in June 11. Argh.

I'll vote for the retest approach. But regardless, I'm hoping for the best for you.

 

Posted 6/30/2011 12:07 PM (GMT 0)
Piano, I have been on the alternative action plan since Nov. last year. Added more to it in Feb.

I am gonna try to ignore the Uro's higher number until I see a definite change, as the Family Doc's results have been consistent for 4 years now. The .12 may be a fluke, but there's no proof either way with one test. so, if I ignore the right column and stick with just one set of data, I am still ok.........for now. smilewinkgrin
Posted 6/30/2011 3:39 PM (GMT 0)
James, Sorry to hear about latest test. Hopefully it is just a lab error and the next test is OK!!!

LIVESTRONG!
Posted 6/30/2011 7:43 PM (GMT 0)
James: not much to say except darn! Was hoping that it would be going down. Like others have said lets see what the next test has to say.

Thinking about you buddy.

Cajun Jeff
Posted 6/30/2011 9:24 PM (GMT 0)
In Southern speak we would say "Dag Nabbit Fritzen Fracken PSA".

James I am with everyone else who is hoping and wishing that the next round of tests show you a whole nother story.

Sonny
Posted 7/1/2011 1:56 AM (GMT 0)
James, I am sorry your number has gone in the wrong direction.

I think the solution will be to work out the assay the old lab used to use and find another lab using the same assay. It will need quite a few phonecalls and a bit of reasearch to work out but I think the effort would be worth it in terms of taking out an extra variable.

I hope, as Sonny says that the next reading will go downwards.

Regards,
An
Posted 7/1/2011 2:33 AM (GMT 0)
James,

Been away and just catching up, so sorry to see this annoying news. I hope for the best for you. Your numbers look like mine. My next test is also in September.

Best,

DJ
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply