Another exception on PCa~not super common though

New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> ]

zufus
Veteran Member


Date Joined Dec 2008
Total Posts : 3149
   Posted 1/27/2009 11:38 AM (GMT -6)   
Can you have a low psa number and be unsafe? Or as John T. eluded to one observation why is it that some of the higher Gleason scores (on some patient) are associated with low psa levels.
 
Answer: some of most aggressive PCa's don't give of much psa's to measure, so knowing your biopsy pathology is very important and not just knowing psa numbers by themselves.
 
There are exceptions on every darn parameter or measurement on PCa issues, much to our undelight and possible peril.
 
Of the 18 PCa variants out there, there are a few of them that the prognosis on them is way more omnious that what most of us are dealing with.
 
(Twlight Zone- is more of what it is)
 


Purgatory
Elite Member


Date Joined Oct 2008
Total Posts : 25364
   Posted 1/27/2009 1:20 PM (GMT -6)   
I agree Zufus. Like everything else with PC, no consitent rule of thumb. Some terrible far progressed cases have reasonbly low PSA attached to them. And some with much higher, are either non pc or low grade. When my numbers were busy rising, I kept trying to convince myself for a couple of years that it might be to non pc relate prostate problems, but everytime they checked, nothing was found. A biopsy that hits positive isnt going to lie though. But then, we all know, how many previous biopsies find nothing, but the cancer is still there.
Age 56, 56 at DX, PSA 7/7 5.8, 7/8 12.3
3rd Biopsy 9/8 Positive 7 of 7 cores pos, 40-90%, Gleason 7
Open RP surgery 11/14/8, Non-nerve sparing, 4 days hospital, staples out 11/24/8, 5th cath out on 1/19/9
Post-surgery Pathlogy Report:Gleason 3+4=7, pT2c, 42 grm, tumor 20%, Contained in capsular, clear margins, clear lymph nodes 
First PSA Post Surgery   2/9/9
 
 


Steve n Dallas
Veteran Member


Date Joined Mar 2008
Total Posts : 4823
   Posted 1/28/2009 4:53 AM (GMT -6)   

Course the PSA is one of many tools and it shouldn't relied upon by itself.

Mine never got over 1.3...

 


Age 53   - 5'11"   205lbs
Overall Heath Condition - Good
PSA - July 2007 & Jan 2008 -> 1.3
Biopsy - 03/04/08 -> Gleason 6 
 
06/25/08 - Da Vinci robotic laparoscopy
Catheter in for five weeks.
Dry after 3 months.
 
10/03/08 - 1st Quarter PSA -> less then .01
01/16/09 - 2nd Quarter PSA -> less then .01
Surgeon - Keith A. Waguespack, M.D.
 


zufus
Veteran Member


Date Joined Dec 2008
Total Posts : 3149
   Posted 1/29/2009 11:37 AM (GMT -6)   
The point I was trying to make more well known is the exception, that highly aggressive Gleasons scores...sometimes...do not give off any or little psa's. So if a patient wonders how he could have low psa's in some strange case and yet be systemic with mets or such, it is for this exception. It is not the norm, but does happen in the crazy world of PCa. Your have to monitor and question plenty with PCa to know what is going on.
 

New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
Forum Information
Currently it is Thursday, April 19, 2018 1:46 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 2,953,254 posts in 323,984 threads.
View Active Threads


Who's Online
This forum has 162061 registered members. Please welcome our newest member, bill ratchet.
423 Guest(s), 10 Registered Member(s) are currently online.  Details
mallardmark, diannega, TS0625, APL1881, mpost, Ljm2014, Spanish, Sherrine, tomobrain, Tall Allen