a lurker
|
From: Steve Jordan on 25 Jul 2008 15:41 Amending my last: Yes, I have seen another reason (other than nerves) for not knowing what's below 0.1 ng/mL. Some say it makes no practical difference, as one is not going to act upon such low numbers. My answer: How about tracking velocity and doubling time? Granted that they are not as important (I believe) as such data at higher levels, but they can and will give the alert patient and his medic early warning. Regards, Steve J
From: Steve Kramer on 25 Jul 2008 16:29 "Steve Jordan" <mycroftscj1(a)cox.net> wrote in message news:J%pik.3873$LF2.2726(a)newsfe09.iad... > Amending my last: > > Yes, I have seen another reason (other than nerves) for not knowing what's > below 0.1 ng/mL. Some say it makes no practical difference, as one is not > going to act upon such low numbers. > > My answer: How about tracking velocity and doubling time? Granted that > they are not as important (I believe) as such data at higher levels, but > they can and will give the alert patient and his medic early warning. After ADT? Quite useful. After Surgery? Just a stressful curiosity. -- 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 PSAD 0.19 years EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 PSAD .056 years Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 and every 4 months there after PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 .145 PSAD 1.4 years Casodex added daily 07/06 PSA <0.04, <0.05, <0.04, <0.04, <0.1 2/12/08 Illegitimati non carborundum
From: Steve Jordan on 25 Jul 2008 16:45 On July 25, Steve K replied to me: (snip) > After ADT? Quite useful. After Surgery? Just a stressful curiosity. And if the surgery was not curative? It happens. Often. But we're not going to settle the issue. I have my choice, supported by some of the best in the business. Others have other views with, I suppose, backgrounds which are satisfactory to them. Each cat his own rat. Regards, Steve J
From: I.P. Freely on 25 Jul 2008 16:49 Steve Kramer wrote: >> My PSA was something like 8.8, PSAV > 2.0, Gleason 4 + 4/8, seminal >> vesicle involvement, negative margins, RP Oct '04. My odds of recurrence >> (I've forgotten whether that was @ 5 or 10 years) were well over 0.5 (the >> coin toss threshold). Now that I'm still running about 0.020 > > So now it's back down to 0.020. > > Lends credance to the theory that no one ought to be tested past 0.1 after > surgery. In my case, yes, as mine went up very linearly about 4 quarters in a row a cuple of years pst-op, then dropped significantly, then back up to about .030 again, then back to about .020. HOWEVER, I'm not a statistic, obviously ... merely one sample, proving only that PSA can bounce around after RRP. I still hope that if/when my PC does return, the supersensitive tests will give me some extra time for research and introspection before action is clearly required. I would not recommend them for anyone with "PSA Anxiety"; just too much volatility. For me, they're just a number on paper until they become clearly significant. And if/when it does, RT is unlikely to help because my margins were negative, implying a recurrence is more likely to be remote. I.P.
From: Steve Kramer on 25 Jul 2008 16:51
"Steve Jordan" <mycroftscj1(a)cox.net> wrote in message news:%Xqik.1586$Bt6.941(a)newsfe04.iad... > On July 25, Steve K replied to me: > > (snip) > >> After ADT? Quite useful. After Surgery? Just a stressful curiosity. > > And if the surgery was not curative? It happens. Often. > > But we're not going to settle the issue. I have my choice, supported by > some of the best in the business. Others have other views with, I suppose, > backgrounds which are satisfactory to them. > > Each cat his own rat. Unfortunately, neither of us has a dog in the fight. |