Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-13-2011, 08:53 PM   #61
Recycles dryer sheets
mark500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 146
Ok. I have hit the PSA dilemma.
Age: 53

PSA
2008: 2.1
2009: 2.8
2011: 3.5

Going to repeat it in 6-8 weeks I guess. PSA screening is worse than mammography. It's a lot easier to biopsy and/or remove a breast than a prostate.

Rich in Tampa, what puzzles me is that autopsy studies have shown that about 1/3 of men in their 50's that die from other causes have a bona fide "prostate cancer". Yet 1/3 of all men do not die of prostate cancer
__________________

__________________
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill
mark500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 03-13-2011, 09:29 PM   #62
Moderator Emeritus
Rich_by_the_Bay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 8,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark500 View Post
Rich in Tampa, what puzzles me is that autopsy studies have shown that about 1/3 of men in their 50's that die from other causes have a bona fide "prostate cancer". Yet 1/3 of all men do not die of prostate cancer
Because prostate cancer usually doesn't kill most of its victims. Many die of other causes, or live with prostate cancer for decades. That's part of the dilemma - we treat so many men with serious modalities whose PC would never have bothered them.

Best wishes on whichever path you choose to follow. You will probably do just fine, as many have. The only thing I can add is to be sure you are getting thorough, scientific, objective advice from your docs. Do what feels right for you.
__________________

__________________
Rich
San Francisco Area
ESR'd March 2010. FIRE'd January 2011.

As if you didn't know..If the above message contains medical content, it's NOT intended as advice, and may not be accurate, applicable or sufficient. Don't rely on it for any purpose. Consult your own doctor for all medical advice.
Rich_by_the_Bay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2011, 09:48 PM   #63
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Waimanalo, HI
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark500 View Post
Ok. I have hit the PSA dilemma.
Age: 53

PSA
2008: 2.1
2009: 2.8
2011: 3.5
Have you? 3.5 is within the normal range given by my lab (though labs may differ). Even the 5.11 score that I got a few days ago is within the age adjusted range, I gather, for a 69 year old. But we share the problematic consistent rise in scores, and my oncologist thinks I'd better contact my urologist --- maybe get a biopsy.
__________________
Greg (retired in 2010 at age 68, state pension)
GregLee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2011, 06:09 PM   #64
Recycles dryer sheets
mark500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 146
Have you? 3.5 is within the normal range given by my lab (though labs may differ). Even the 5.11 score that I got a few days ago is within the age adjusted range,

You may be right, but the lab used 3.1 as upper normal for some reason.
I should not overreact, but it is deflating to know that this will be an issue now or as I get older. I was hoping to not deal with it until i hit at least 60. This PSA issue for men is really a can of worms. We urgently need a new or better screening test. I don't want to end up with the outcome that Dan Fogleberg had, but I don't want to risk ED and incontinence for 30 years for a prostate cancer that will kill me when I am 85. Therein lies the rub. We don't know which low/intermediate grade cancers need treatment.
But we play with the hand we are dealt.
__________________
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill
mark500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2011, 12:49 PM   #65
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Mulligan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 7,384
I just read in my morning STL Post Dispatch today, the prostate screening debate continues, as it was titled "Prostate screening doesn't save lives, study finds" . It was referring to the Swedish men study of 9000 men. We already know the particular reasons for and against the procedure, but the article didn't provide a positive reason to do it, just reasons not too. A couple of interesting comments I read were, American Cancer Society does not recommend routine screening for most men, and no government screening program exists in Britain because officials say the PSA test is too unreliable. They got 3 and a half years to clear this up as that's when my doctor wants me to take my first one. I sure hope the eventual answer is don't take it!
__________________
Mulligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2011, 12:57 PM   #66
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Waimanalo, HI
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulligan View Post
I sure hope the eventual answer is don't take it!
Well, why? It's no trouble.
__________________
Greg (retired in 2010 at age 68, state pension)
GregLee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2011, 01:10 PM   #67
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
MasterBlaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulligan View Post
I just read in my morning STL Post Dispatch today, the prostate screening debate continues, as it was titled "Prostate screening doesn't save lives, study finds" . It was referring to the Swedish men study of 9000 men. We already know the particular reasons for and against the procedure, but the article didn't provide a positive reason to do it, just reasons not too. A couple of interesting comments I read were, American Cancer Society does not recommend routine screening for most men, and no government screening program exists in Britain because officials say the PSA test is too unreliable. They got 3 and a half years to clear this up as that's when my doctor wants me to take my first one. I sure hope the eventual answer is don't take it!

Here's a link to the article:

Screening for Prostate Cancer Doesn't Save Lives (British Medical Journal) - Daniel Fromson - Life - The Atlantic#
__________________
MasterBlaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2011, 01:12 PM   #68
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Mulligan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 7,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee
Well, why? It's no trouble.
Based on what I read, I don't want to have to deal with getting a number back, that would suggest I have to get treatment from a false positive test that would result in impotence and/or incontinence. It also mentioned psychological distress which doesn't sound fun either. I admit it may be illogical to put your head in the sand on health issues, but unfortunately I am kind of there in this area of health matters.
__________________
Mulligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2011, 01:35 PM   #69
Moderator Emeritus
Rich_by_the_Bay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 8,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post
Well, why? It's no trouble.
...until you get a borderline abnormal result, then biopsies (of which 6 out of 7 will be negative). Or you will have early cancer the treatment of which is of unproven benefit, as well as a small incidence of incontinence or impotence.

Then again I suppose you could be one of those rare men whose cancer is cured under this scenario, and which would otherwise have been fatal.

It's not that simple.
__________________
Rich
San Francisco Area
ESR'd March 2010. FIRE'd January 2011.

As if you didn't know..If the above message contains medical content, it's NOT intended as advice, and may not be accurate, applicable or sufficient. Don't rely on it for any purpose. Consult your own doctor for all medical advice.
Rich_by_the_Bay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2011, 01:44 PM   #70
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Waimanalo, HI
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich_in_Tampa View Post
...until you get a borderline abnormal result, ...
I do, actually, have a borderline abnormal result. I haven't decided what to do about it, if anything. But I'm not in a fit of anxiety over it --- I think it is relevant information I want to know about. Maybe it helps me psychologically to have already had cancer and, probably, recovered from it.
__________________
Greg (retired in 2010 at age 68, state pension)
GregLee is offline   Reply With Quote
psa
Old 04-06-2011, 07:00 AM   #71
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 79
psa

What's the sense of having a psa test if it doesn't prolong your life?
My urologist says an increase in psa of .6 or more requires further tests.
I went from 4 to 5.4 in 12 months. Went to urlogist and he wanted to do biopsy. Found better urlogist and he put me on ciprol for two weeks and then another psa test. I am 62 and had one bad experience with biopsy 7 years ago, negative. My new Url does biopsy's while under anisthetic, sounds good to me. But is all this necessary if I die from something else first?
__________________
lynxville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 01:26 PM   #72
Moderator Emeritus
Nords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oahu
Posts: 26,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich_in_Tampa View Post
I have had at least two patients (one a physician) die of of sepsis after biopsy, and a dozen more require hospitalization and IV antibiotics.
While this is not news in the medical field, it's been picked up by Business Week:
Prostate Exam Deaths From Superbugs Spur Cancer-Test Inquiry - Businessweek

Apparently the risk of sepsis depends on how that needle is routed through your anatomy and what kind of E. coli it picks up along the way. If you're a world traveler with some interesting critters helping your digestion, then the biopsy question just got a lot more interesting as well. And if you're a doctor who's been around some interesting patient infections, let alone a world-traveling doctor, then it certainly seems to be a concern.

Quote:
Nam helped uncover the emerging infection risk last year after he trawled through more than 75,000 electronic records of biopsy patients treated in Ontario between 1996 and 2005. When he looked at hospital admissions among patients whose biopsy was negative for cancer, Nam discovered the chance of being hospitalized within a month of the procedure had increased fourfold in less than a decade, reaching 4.1 percent in 2005 from 1 percent in 1996, according to the Journal of Urology report.
When Nam searched for the cause of the hospitalizations, he found 72 percent had an infection-related diagnosis. Nam’s research group is examining individual case files to determine the cause and severity of the infections and which patients had drug-resistant bacteria.
The human brain's heuristics are an interesting problem. "1%" doesn't seem so bad at first glance, but "4.1%" is a combination of both a larger number and a decimal place. Very intimidating.

This certainly doesn't motivate me to run right over to the clinic for a blood test. Or maybe I'm just waiting until the memories fade from my world-class colonoscopy.
__________________
*
*

The book written on E-R.org, "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement", on sale now! For more info see "About Me" in my profile.
I don't spend much time here anymore, so please send me a PM. Thanks.
Nords is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 02:10 PM   #73
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,863
My PSA was high, forget now what it was, something like 10. I had the biopsy at the urologists office with a local, 12 samples since my prostate was so large. One of the more painful things I've ever done. Loaded up with Levaquin antibiotic. They lost the samples! Did the biopsy again at the hospital as an out patient, with full anesthetic. No problem there until later in the evening. I had two 12 oz cans of soda in me but couldn't pee. Very uncomfortable, though not exactly painful. Had to go to the emergency room and have a nurse insert a catheter, for which I was very grateful. Had the urologist's nurse take out the catheter the next day. The results of the biopsy were negative.

It would be really nice to have a more reliable test!
__________________
Animorph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 02:25 PM   #74
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,210
"Ok. I have hit the PSA dilemma.
Age: 53

PSA
2008: 2.1
2009: 2.8
2011: 3.5

Going to repeat it in 6-8 weeks I guess. PSA screening is worse than mammography. It's a lot easier to biopsy and/or remove a breast than a prostate."

MY GP and urologist both told me a spike in the PSA is of more concern than the actual number...which is why I had 2 bopsies over the last 14 months. The first was very uncomfortable (I was mildly sedated so maybe that is why it was not unbearably painful). However, the second was 100% pain free - I was completely out for that one. I forget the details, but besides the anesthesia it was done differently. Maybe you can mention this to your urologist and it will ring a bell with him and go that route for you.
__________________
mystang52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 02:36 PM   #75
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Waimanalo, HI
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nords View Post
Apparently the risk of sepsis depends on how that needle is routed through your anatomy and what kind of E. coli it picks up along the way.
Now that the problem has been noticed, I predict a solution will be found. If the needle is picking up bad s*** in the rectum and transporting it to the prostate, a prep of the sort given before a colonoscopy should be helpful. Or you can imagine a smaller clean needle that is unsheathed after a larger needle has already made its way through the rectum.
__________________
Greg (retired in 2010 at age 68, state pension)
GregLee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 02:52 PM   #76
Moderator Emeritus
Rich_by_the_Bay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 8,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post
Now that the problem has been noticed, I predict a solution will be found. If the needle is picking up bad s*** in the rectum and transporting it to the prostate, a prep of the sort given before a colonoscopy should be helpful. Or you can imagine a smaller clean needle that is unsheathed after a larger needle has already made its way through the rectum.
Just curious where you get your information for the stuff you post?

Colon prep does not sterilize the colon and sepsis following colonoscopic biopsy is a recognized risk.

Biopsy needles have a cannula that can push the contaminants into the underlying tissue. Probably the incidence of infection following prostate relates to the performance of many biopsies at one session.

The risk:benefit of PSA-screening-related prostate biopsy is very, very marginal. A few are winners (maybe), a few are losers and a whole bunch suffer the discomfort and fear with 6 chances out of 7 that the biopsy will be negative; it is not even known whether finding the occasional cancer this way saves lives or improves quality. Discuss carefully with your doctor before deciding.
__________________
Rich
San Francisco Area
ESR'd March 2010. FIRE'd January 2011.

As if you didn't know..If the above message contains medical content, it's NOT intended as advice, and may not be accurate, applicable or sufficient. Don't rely on it for any purpose. Consult your own doctor for all medical advice.
Rich_by_the_Bay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 03:05 PM   #77
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Waimanalo, HI
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich_in_Tampa View Post
Just curious where you get your information for the stuff you post?

Colon prep does not sterilize the colon and sepsis following colonoscopic biopsy is a recognized risk.
My reasoning is that colon prep would reduce the harmful bacteria and hence the risk of infection, not make the colon sterile. Since there was no information in my post -- it was just a speculation -- I don't know how to answer your question.
__________________
Greg (retired in 2010 at age 68, state pension)
GregLee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 04:57 PM   #78
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
braumeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Northern Kentucky
Posts: 8,630
I still think biopsy has its place.
I've had three of them (all negative, thankfully). First one was with nothing (one of the most uncomfortable experiences you can possibly imagine), the next two with light sedation.

There was one rather funny side effect on my first one. Apparently they nicked a vein, and my first urination after the procedure was bright red. As was the next, and the next. After about three days, the blood was finally gone, but I thought it was hilarious.
__________________
Pas de lieu Rhône que nous.
braumeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 05:47 PM   #79
Moderator Emeritus
Rich_by_the_Bay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 8,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by braumeister View Post
I still think biopsy has its place.
I've had three of them (all negative, thankfully). First one was with nothing (one of the most uncomfortable experiences you can possibly imagine), the next two with light sedation.

There was one rather funny side effect on my first one. Apparently they nicked a vein, and my first urination after the procedure was bright red. As was the next, and the next. After about three days, the blood was finally gone, but I thought it was hilarious.
Uh.. glad it turned out OK, but what was it you found so funny?
__________________
Rich
San Francisco Area
ESR'd March 2010. FIRE'd January 2011.

As if you didn't know..If the above message contains medical content, it's NOT intended as advice, and may not be accurate, applicable or sufficient. Don't rely on it for any purpose. Consult your own doctor for all medical advice.
Rich_by_the_Bay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 06:03 PM   #80
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
braumeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Northern Kentucky
Posts: 8,630
The sight of the deep red pee. I suppose some would have been alarmed, but I realized what happened and just thought it was amusing.
__________________

__________________
Pas de lieu Rhône que nous.
braumeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PSA haha FIRE and Money 0 06-20-2008 08:55 AM
Seesaw PSA FinallyRetired Health and Early Retirement 15 06-18-2007 07:13 AM
PSA for Women kjrn Other topics 4 06-02-2007 02:06 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:54 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.