I think my issue is that several different labs were involved. The first two were in NY, the next four were at two different centres in CT and yesterday's was at a private hospital in the UK. They all seem to have varying degrees of specificity when reporting. Frankly they were all <0.1 so I'd have been very happy with that result every test. Getting down to two and now three decimal places just freaks you out a bit.
To be specific to your question and to follow on from my point above, my Uro was not concerned about
the rise to 0.04. He said that every centre, technician, equipment would produce slightly different results and that I should only call him if the number went over 0.1.....he certainly wasn't in the ">0.03 camp". I took comfort from that as he is a cautious guy and it was him that insisted on a biopsy when I hit 2.2 and he was adamant that RALP was the right way forward for me. The surgeon agreed with him. I think I've been one of the lucky ones...no incontinence, no ED and a bunch of zeros.....but I've taken a route that many would consider unnecessarily aggressive (early surgery with my stats) so in some ways I guess I have made my own luck. My over-riding principle was "get this out of me now, just in case something may spread". I think partially that was driven by my father's situation with throat cancer - his docs said "we're confident we got it all and it hasn't spread"....six months later he was gone.
Happy to answer more, not sure if I really covered your points.
Age 49 at DX
Jan-14 - PSA 2.2 (priors 1.5, 0.9, 1.1, 0.7). Biopsy 2 of 12 +ve (3+3). Clear bone scan, MRI, CT scan
May-14 - Nerve sparing RALP. Prostate size 25cc. GS 3+3, <5% involved. -ve margins.
Oct-14 - Post incisional hernia repair (caused by RALP)
PSA Jun14 <0.1, Nov14 <0.1, May15 0.01, Nov15 0.02 Feb16 0.04 May16 0.01 May17 <0.002
Post Edited (We can do this) : 5/11/2017 4:15:55 PM (GMT-6)