Got the results from LabCorp

OK, they just called me from my URO's office with the results, so that is also different. Though they are sending them off to a new lab- LabCorp- the results are unchanged from what their office in house results have been getting for over a year: 0.06. I guess I can trust that #, in fact I don't have much choice except to do so.

So though I long ago lost my <.01 #, and had the triple in just 3 months that happened 1 year and 3 months ago(at the time of machine change), I still remain unchanged since then. And I guess that was an accurate result, since the new test from a new lab confirms it.

But unless I truly had a triple in production( from .02-.06) in just 3 months, this confirmation must be saying that their older machines were reading somewhat low. I'll never know. Either way, I am blessed to have made it almost 5.5 years from diagnoses and then surgery only for very high risk with no BCR so far. So, I am thankful for that. I certainly got in plenty of time for "healing" before having to start any other treatments! I was hoping for at least a year or 2, so I have no excuse not to be thankful.

Billybob, good work, hoping you remain stable for many years to come

that's good news

Thanks, all, it is good news indeed to still be hanging in there 5 1/2 years later. This disease is a long battle.

Very good news. Congratulations!

Paul

Thanks every one!

TJ123 said...
That's a positive sign that your .06 has remained stable for over a year. Whatever it is it's not aggressively pumping out PSA. I don't even think the experts can pinpoint a solid reason for such puzzling results. In the meantime it's cause for celebration. Good for you.

Mine are no less puzzling. My normal labs use the Advia Centaur methodology apparently associated w/ Siemens. The only time it gave me the all clear <.01 reading was about 2 years ago. Otherwise I've been low detectable ranging from .01 to .04 - interestingly enough on a downward slope to the present. The latest was .01. God only knows why.

OTOH, I've had 2 ultrasensitive tests using the Roche ELICA methodology from Labcorp. Both tests came back <.006 which is as good as it gets. Go figure.

So the one methodology says I have small amounts of PSA in my body, which is declining as time marches on - and the other one says it can't detect any.

Being an optimist, of course I believe Roche ELICIA (Labcorp), which must perform a gazillion of these tests each year. But how one method can find PSA as high as .03 while comes up completely empty is a real head-scratcher.

So I've decided to cut back on testing to twice a year as opposed to quarterly. That way I only have to sweat it out every 6 months.

All the best.

.................................................................................................................................................................
Interesting experience and comments, TJ!

You may be the main guy I was thinking of - though not the only one- when I said(probably in my previous thread titled "PSA now sent to LabCorp") that if memory served some labs were "bad" and some were "good" based on the experience of some here. Because some folks had widely varying results when using different labs. And leaving out the "<" for now(which means possibly you had an even a greater difference), .04 is 6.66 times more than .006. By any one's standards, that is a big difference in results, and the difference has nothing to do with how much PC may or may not be in your system. It is just a huge difference between the labs, and who knows which one is correct.

The more I think about it, the more I conclude that my old lab was incorrect when they had me stable at .02 or less for about a year ( even <.01 five years ago) and the a sudden increase. Since the current LabCorp confirms the previous years worth of .06 readings, it seems likely to me that the scare I got when I had a sudden triple in 3 months was a false scare. Because I didn't get a sudden increase, but had likely already been .06 for some unknown time period. Since there has been no further increase in at least a year, as confirmed by the same lab that gives you a <.006, who know how long I might have already been .06.

I sort of hate that, as I have always taken some comfort(considering my high risk) in that I was <.01 for 1 1/2years, then only .01 for 1 1/2 years. But in reality, maybe I was never that low? I think it also goes to show that we just can not trust what these machines are telling us as they try to measure these incomprehensibly low levels. But, the news is still pretty good (IMO) even if I have been .06 for longer than I have thought, because I have not increased any in at least a year(maybe longer, who knows what those real #s were?). Also, I have not managed to exceed .06 at any time in almost 5 1/2 years, even using different labs. So I am going to assume that is over all good news and follow your advice for celebration!

Billy, your theory that the previous lab understated your true PSA level is as good as any. But at the aggressive grade 4+5 and SV+ your .06 is a real success story. One aspect in your favor is that the PC hadn't extended through the capsule, as mine did. You have every reason to remain positive. Stable is good. After 5 years it would seem that if there was aggressive PC left behind it would have already reared it's ugly head and forced you into secondary treatment. I wonder how many others (%) who experienced similar adverse pathology as yourself have remained BCR free? Have you ever researched that using the nomograms? If so, what did you find? I'm curious.

My labs are hard to figure out. As I mentioned, the Siemen's Advia Centaur method has been my normal test since the start. Same lab. The original .04 was drawn about 2 mo and a week after RALP. That might have been a little early (not all the accumulated PSA had left my body). 3 months later it measured undetectable <.01. So there's a reasonable explanation for the drop. Then it started to slowly rise to .02 then fall to .01 then rise to .03 then fall to .01 again. No idea why. My only theories are the inexactness of the test itself or perhaps a little benign tissue that's dying. Then the wildcard is the Labcorp labs that both had me at <.006. Who the hell knows?

There was another poster (his moniker escapes me) who had a similar situation as mine. His ultrasensitive Siemen's labs indicated a small but detectable level of PSA. He paid out of pocket to get tested at Labcorp and I believe one other popular blood testing site. Both showed undetectable levels.

I don't think they've scientifically mastered the ultrasensitive PSA testing at this point. The numbers themselves aren't quite as important as the trend. Naturally, the trend is what I look for. And it appears that both of us are in decent shape all things considered.

My doctors ask me if I take supplements. I do. Resveratrol, Vit D (4-5000 IU), Cayenne, fish oil. It's a mixed reaction. Most support the fish oil (for heart and triglyceride reduction), go along with the Vit D (yet at lower dosing), but question the Resveratrol and Cayenne. Interestingly, most ask "How much do you pay for that stuff?" When I tell them about $15 a month they just shrug their shoulders.

But I also take prescription Metformin for T2D and Atorvastatin to control stenosis. There is literature that seems to indicate both MIGHT help slow progression of PC - but I don't know how strong that data is or whether it has helped me. But I'll continue to stay the course as long as I stay off the SRT table.

I'm no expert. But it seems to me (using layman's common sense) if you made it 10 years w/o BCR the monkey would be off your back. My guess is that few people recur after 10 years. If 4+5 didn't rear it's ugly head by that time it's hard to imagine that it would. And if MSKC says you've got a better than 50% chance of getting there those are sweet odds. I've had docs tell me since I've broken through the 3 year mark w/o BCR that I'm likely out of the woods. But after reading testimonials of others that rebut such prognoses I believe it's overly optimistic. 3 years is not enough time. But I have to say that the anxiety I used to feel leading up the the PSA tests and during the waiting period before the numbers are reported has subsided by 90%. We adapt.

PCa is a strange disease. None of my blood relatives developed any sort of cancer. Lots of heart disease. No cancer. I'm the first. My PSA history shows that I probably had PCa for 12-15 years before it was treated. Had I known it had grown outside the prostate obviously I would've had it treated years earlier. But just a theory - perhaps once the disease surfaced my genetic predisposition was better able to fight it off or at least keep it at bay. That would be an interesting study. Put together groups of PCa patients - with and without familial histories of PCa - at comparable Gleasons, stages and other adverse pathologies. Then determine if one group BCR'ed more or less than the other. PCa is a very individual disease but genetics seems to play a major role across the board in most human medical maladies.

Just curious. Do or did you have any blood relatives who had PCa or any type of cancer? But not taking prescription meds at 70 years of age (not even for high blood pressure?) tells me that you have a strong genetic predisposition to sidestep disease. Based on recollection I believe I read that the average 70 year old takes 5 meds. Hell, I'm already there! And I've been an athlete all my life!!! I can't remember the last time I had a bowl of ice cream, a donut or even a piece of pie. darn it! It ain't fair!!!

Even if I BCR I'll die of heart disease long before metastasis gets me. So I watch my diet and exercise heavy at the gym 4 days a week to stave off the grim reaper for as long as I can. But nothing in this life is guaranteed. Some of the best advice I ever received was to live in the moment. Easier said than done.

TJ123 said...
I'm no expert. But it seems to me (using layman's common sense) if you made it 10 years w/o BCR the monkey would be off your back. My guess is that few people recur after 10 years. If 4+5 didn't rear it's ugly head by that time it's hard to imagine that it would. And if MSKC says you've got a better than 50% chance of getting there those are sweet odds. I've had docs tell me since I've broken through the 3 year mark w/o BCR that I'm likely out of the woods. But after reading testimonials of others that rebut such prognoses I believe it's overly optimistic. 3 years is not enough time. But I have to say that the anxiety I used to feel leading up the the PSA tests and during the waiting period before the numbers are reported has subsided by 90%. We adapt.

Bill: And of course, even if we finally BCR, that is stlll a long way(for most of us) from mets and death. It is probably a long way(on average) even without additional treatment, though I don't have stats on that. ( Isn't the average- without treatment I suppose- from BCR to mets 8 years, and from mets to death 5 years? Any one remember the true stats on that?)

I am thinking of my neighbor, diagnosed years ago during a non-cancer prostate surgery. But due to his age or whatever reasons, the decision was made for no treatment. Last I heard from him his PSA was 20 something(still has at least part of his prostate, did not have an RP or any other treatment) I don't recall his exact age, but well into his 80s. But I still see him often walking the neighborhood or working in his yard(his wife died of Alzheimer's 5 or 10 years ago). But he has had that cancer and high PSA for at least the 5 years since my surgery, and he just keeps going on, apparently not bothered by it. He is like the opposite side of the coin of a HS friend, several years younger than me, who died at about age 63 from PC.

Of course, most of us at this forum are going to have additional treatment, many of us well before BCR actually occurs, as soon as we see a confirmed upward trend. Or even before any confirmed trend, just based on post op pathology or persistent PSA post RP, not taking any chances. But the point is, either way, BCR can be a long ways to clinical problems from metastatic PC. Though it might usher us into additional treatments for sure. Logo has an interesting approach: he just stopped getting PSAs!...........................................................................................................................................................................

TJ: "PCa is a strange disease. None of my blood relatives developed any sort of cancer. Lots of heart disease. No cancer. I'm the first. ..............Just curious. Do or did you have any blood relatives who had PCa or any type of cancer? "
Bill: None that I know of for certain with PC. I think most of us died too young for that. My mother died of cancer, I think she was first diagnosed with cervical cancer while in the hospital for life saving surgery for burst cerebral aneurysm. She had a good life for about 14 years after that, but later colon/liver cancer got her. My gather went from some unknown head related something when I was 3 years old. I was always told it was a stroke, but searching on ancestry sites I found a newspaper article indicating a head injury from a fall. But no details. So it seems I am most likely to go from cerebral hemorrhage or strokes, although it was finally cancer that took my mom out. I had an aunt that cancer took out. And an uncle that had a lot of bone pain before cancer killed him. But I never heard the word "prostate" used for him, just "cancer".
............................................................................................................................................................


TJ: "But not taking prescription meds at 70 years of age (not even for high blood pressure?) tells me that you have a strong genetic predisposition to sidestep disease. Based on recollection I believe I read that the average 70 year old takes 5 meds. Hell, I'm already there! And I've been an athlete all my life!!! I can't remember the last time I had a bowl of ice cream, a donut or even a piece of pie. darn it! It ain't fair!!!"
Bill: Nope, not even hi BP. I was well on my way to hypertension about age 49-50, checking my BP at work I would often be 140/90 and steadily rising. I knew for sure if I went to a doc they would get me on BP meds, also my cholesterol was a little high but my triglycerides(TGL) were something over 200. ( Don't remember exactly, just remember that it was flagged for being over their top allowable # of 200) So they would probably get me on statins as well as BP meds. But I was also at my lifetime largest gut, and I decided to tackle that before getting a prescription. So I started eating low carb/hi fat( first Sugar Busters, then the Zone, finally Atkins), and 6 months later my BP was 103/60 and TGL were about 50, and my gut was gone(minus 42 lbs). Over the years as I have temporarily put a lot of weight back on by hi carb eating, before I bring it back down, my BP has remained either just OK enough to not need meds, or downright low. I might read any where from 103 to 130 on the top #, depending on how I am eating and how big my gut is. Whenever I get worried about it, it scares me enough that I just reverse it with diet(aka low carb and/or fasting). I'm lucky to be able to control it that way so far.
..........................................................................................................................................................................................

TJ "Even if I BCR I'll die of heart disease long before metastasis gets me. So I watch my diet and exercise heavy at the gym 4 days a week to stave off the grim reaper for as long as I can. But nothing in this life is guaranteed. Some of the best advice I ever received was to live in the moment. Easier said than done.".
Yep, something is going to get us! For most of us PC patients, it is going to be something other than PC, I think.