2 year checkup results
Doc says things are fine..........
one thing concerned me, two previous (6 months and 12 month) PSA values were < 0.06
Mondays PSA reading was 0.1 ...........
Doc indicates that they are one and the same, and that its "zero". I have used the same lab every time, if you were me, would you accept that as a zero, or raise an eyebrow that it is no longer < 0.06 ?
Comments
-
Low Detection Limits of Assays
Laboratories use several types of assays which can vary in results, depending in their detection limits. The ultra sensitive with readings on the two decimal places (0.XX ng/ml) were used in your 6 and 12 month tests. This time the assay's low detection limit may have been for one decimal place (0.X ng/ml).
If the above is correct than your doctor’s assertion is valid. Any number below 0.1 (ex; <0.06) is considered 0.1.
You can repeat the test and request for the ultra sensitive, just for peace of mind.
I hope for your continuous path in the Zeros World.
The best to you.
VGama0 -
First conrats on your 2 year
First conrats on your 2 year anniversary! I would keep track of your result for comparision on your next test. Many men go by the ultra sensitive test since it can more accurately show a doubling time. However my Doctor uses the single digit test. I've asked my Doctor about this and he has told me that in his opinion that men tend to worry to much with the ultra sensitive test.
If you hit the .2 number then your doctor may incourage taking further action. Best wishes as you continue your journey.
lewvino0 -
THanks,lewvino said:First conrats on your 2 year
First conrats on your 2 year anniversary! I would keep track of your result for comparision on your next test. Many men go by the ultra sensitive test since it can more accurately show a doubling time. However my Doctor uses the single digit test. I've asked my Doctor about this and he has told me that in his opinion that men tend to worry to much with the ultra sensitive test.
If you hit the .2 number then your doctor may incourage taking further action. Best wishes as you continue your journey.
lewvino
Yes, the doctor
THanks,
Yes, the doctor indicated that >0.2 is an issue when I questioned him, in fact he said that not long ago, they used 0.4 as the time to radiate criteria.
I just was curious, I deal with numbers (at work) alot, so I was doing the math.... :-)
-marc0
Discussion Boards
- All Discussion Boards
- 6 CSN Information
- 6 Welcome to CSN
- 121.8K Cancer specific
- 2.8K Anal Cancer
- 446 Bladder Cancer
- 309 Bone Cancers
- 1.6K Brain Cancer
- 28.5K Breast Cancer
- 397 Childhood Cancers
- 27.9K Colorectal Cancer
- 4.6K Esophageal Cancer
- 1.2K Gynecological Cancers (other than ovarian and uterine)
- 13K Head and Neck Cancer
- 6.4K Kidney Cancer
- 671 Leukemia
- 792 Liver Cancer
- 4.1K Lung Cancer
- 5.1K Lymphoma (Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin)
- 237 Multiple Myeloma
- 7.1K Ovarian Cancer
- 61 Pancreatic Cancer
- 487 Peritoneal Cancer
- 5.5K Prostate Cancer
- 1.2K Rare and Other Cancers
- 539 Sarcoma
- 730 Skin Cancer
- 653 Stomach Cancer
- 191 Testicular Cancer
- 1.5K Thyroid Cancer
- 5.8K Uterine/Endometrial Cancer
- 6.3K Lifestyle Discussion Boards