PSA when to Biopsy
|
From: Ed Kratz on 2 Mar 2006 06:04 As some of you may recall, I've posted a few times before. As ever, I appreciate the help I"ve gotten from the group I'm waiiting the results of a 3rd PSA test in the last few months. Reason is a PSA of 5.4 in September, after a 1.6 in January 2004. (I'm 58) Repeat in November was 1.9 -- good news -- but a repeat in January 2006 was 2.5 Just finished 4 weeks of levaquin, and am taking a bunch of supplements. Now, I'm waiting the results of the re-test. Saw a URO who recommended biopsy if one more PSA was over 2.3 Just wondered if that seemed reasonable to the group. My internist has also scheduled the free PSA,, but that won't be done unless my PSA is over 4.0 Any comments, advice woudl be appreciated. Thanks, Ed
From: ron on 2 Mar 2006 09:41 Ed...It is thought thst fPSA is meaningful even when the tPSA is less than 4.0. For example: The Journal of Urology 2002; 168(3):922-925 Robustness of Free Prostate Specific Antigen Measurements to Reduce Unnecessary Biopsies in the 2.6 to 4.0 ng./ml. Range KIMBERLY A. ROEHL; JO ANN V. ANTENOR; WILLIAM J. CATALONA* Conclusions: Percent free PSA provides risk assessment but does not eliminate many unnecessary prostatic biopsies while maintaining a high sensitivity in the narrow total PSA range of 2.6 to 4.0 ng./ml. ....Ron
From: Steve Kramer on 2 Mar 2006 10:27 Ed, there are several causes of PSA increase. It is more common to experience one of them than it is to have cancer. However, assuming you had some infection and the drugs knocked it out the chafe, your PSA shows a steady rise of about 1.6, 1.9 and 2.5. That doesn't make it cancer, but if it were cancer, that is a pattern we'd expect. And, we'd expect another reading before taking further action. I think your doc is using appropriate restraint thus far. -- PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46 Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins PSA .1 .1 .1 .27 .37 .75 EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 (4 mo), 12/03, 4/04, 09/04, 01/05, 5/05, 10/05, 2/06 PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 Non Illegitimi Carborundum "Ed Kratz" <ekratz2(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:qjANf.5611$S25.90(a)newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net... > As some of you may recall, I've posted a few times before. > As ever, I appreciate the help I"ve gotten from the group > I'm waiiting the results of a 3rd PSA test in the last few months. > Reason is a PSA of 5.4 in September, after a 1.6 in January 2004. (I'm 58) > Repeat in November was 1.9 -- good news -- but a repeat in January 2006 > was 2.5 > Just finished 4 weeks of levaquin, and am taking a bunch of supplements. > Now, I'm waiting the results of the re-test. > Saw a URO who recommended biopsy if one more PSA was over 2.3 > Just wondered if that seemed reasonable to the group. > > My internist has also scheduled the free PSA,, but that won't be done > unless my PSA is over 4.0 > > Any comments, advice woudl be appreciated. > > Thanks, > > Ed >
From: JK@work on 2 Mar 2006 13:55 "Ed Kratz" <ekratz2(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:qjANf.5611$S25.90(a)newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net... > As some of you may recall, I've posted a few times before. > As ever, I appreciate the help I"ve gotten from the group > I'm waiiting the results of a 3rd PSA test in the last few months. > Reason is a PSA of 5.4 in September, after a 1.6 in January 2004. (I'm 58) > Repeat in November was 1.9 -- good news -- but a repeat in January 2006 was > 2.5 > Just finished 4 weeks of levaquin, and am taking a bunch of supplements. > Now, I'm waiting the results of the re-test. > Saw a URO who recommended biopsy if one more PSA was over 2.3 > Just wondered if that seemed reasonable to the group. > >> Any comments, advice woudl be appreciated. > > Thanks, > > Ed > > Reasonable would be to listen to your doc. A biopsy is not a big deal, and worth the effort. -- JK Sinrod www.sinrodstudios.com www.MyConeyIslandMemories
From: Ed Kratz on 2 Mar 2006 16:58
Ron, Thanks. Unfortunately , if my PSA is less than 4.00 the lab the latest went to probably won't do free psa. I should have asked first. Thanks, Ed "ron" <oitbso(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1141310485.493983.222810(a)u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... > Ed...It is thought thst fPSA is meaningful even when the tPSA is less > than 4.0. For example: > > The Journal of Urology 2002; 168(3):922-925 > Robustness of Free Prostate Specific Antigen Measurements to Reduce > Unnecessary Biopsies in the 2.6 to 4.0 ng./ml. Range > KIMBERLY A. ROEHL; JO ANN V. ANTENOR; WILLIAM J. CATALONA* > Conclusions: Percent free PSA provides risk assessment but does not > eliminate many unnecessary prostatic biopsies while maintaining a high > sensitivity in the narrow total PSA range of 2.6 to 4.0 ng./ml. > > ...Ron > |