Ed, was your 2/15/19 value 0.009 or 0.09
? It's impossible to know from something like .
009 whether the the leading zero is just missing
or the decimal point was misplaced in error
A change from 0.009 to 0.126 is fairly large; that from 0.09 to 0.126 not so big.
Just a note that no lab will ever report .009 as a medical lab result -- it's best not to write decimal values below 1 without a zero in front of the decimal point (except for gun calibers, baseball hitting averages, and a couple of other conventions). Omitting the leading zero always opens the door to the above-mentioned ambiguity
. (Similarly we don't put unnecessary leading zeros before values of 1 or higher, except, perhaps for James Bond and colleagues.)
Further, the fact that some of your values have 2 decimal places and some have 3 would indicate that, although these are all what we now call ultrasensitive
, different uPSA methods were used, making comparisons harder. For example, Quest's "post-prostatectomy" PSA test has 2 decimal places, while Labcorp's "ultrasensitive" test has 3.
Did you skip a PSA test in 2020?
Post Edited (DjinTonic) : 4/9/2021 3:33:07 PM (GMT-6)