PSA Doubled in One Year

[bmcgonig]

According to the NIH (National Institute of Health), the false positive rate is 75%. Here is the link to the NIH report:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3183963/

If you're in the 4 ballpark or a little above I can see the attitude of the test possibly being confusing and leading to biopsies which can have complications etc. But suppose your PSA shoots up to 20 or 30 or whatever. Wouldn't you want to know?

 

[Teacher Terry]

My uncle died from prostrate cancer. I think this was before routine testing was done.

 

[Offgrid Organic Farmer]

My uncle died from prostrate cancer. I think this was before routine testing was done.

In 2014 my PCP and health network had stopped doing PSA testing before I went in for an annual physical. I had to demand that the PSA test be included in my blood work-up.

It was that test, that started the path toward detecting my cancer. As I had no symptoms.

If we had not detected it that year then I would surely be dying of bone cancer today.

PSA testing saved my life.

 

[Teacher Terry]

It also saved my husband’s life at age 49.

 

[6miths]

PSA is being used for prostate cancer screening. When someone has a result that is above the agreed upon cut off and does not have prostate cancer, by definition, they have a 'false positive'. This is 75% of the 'positive' tests. Of the 25% that are 'true positives' (the men have prostate cancer), up to half of the cancers would not have caused symptoms or problems in the men's lifetime.

These are the facts. Please do not imply otherwise.

The most respected body in the United States that gives opinions on screening does not recommend routine screening for low risk men in an opinion released in May 2018. https://screeningforprostatecancer.org/

Men who have a family history of prostate cancer, have certain familial cancers in their family or are African American should be followed more closely.

It is not difficult to understand why people hold strong opinions about this but it is unreasonable not to acknowledge the serious potential harms involved in routine screening. It is heartening to hear of some who have benefited from PSA testing.

 

[grasshopper]

Hate when that happens, it happened to me 5 years ago, biopsy said I had a little bit in one spot. Today my PSA is under 3 my urologist says forget it, something else will kill you. I still have a visit and PSA every 6 months just to be sure. Yea I know I should have an MRI but the spot after the 2nd biopsy was but .5 mm, would never show on an MRI. Veghead for 25 years, a little fish only when in Costa Rica, Hawaii, Alaska, or the Galapagos. Oh and took SS at 62.

 

[Teacher Terry]

If you get it when you are old it is usually no big deal. But having it at 49 was a big deal.

 

[audreyh1]

I thought I would provide an update for those who have been following this thread. Again, thanks to all those who contributed to this thread and offered to me lots of things to consider.

Today I met with a highly regarded urologist at a major teaching hospital. A DRE was performed and the result is that I have BPH. This is consistent with the symptoms I have been having that many of us post 50 males know all too well. A prescription for generic Flomax (Tamsulosin HCL) was given and I am supposed to take this for a month to see if symptoms improve. If symptoms improve, I am to continue taking it.

The idea is that a larger prostate will produce a higher PSA number. So in six months, I am to have my PSA tested again. One week after that, I have an 3T MRI scheduled and then an immediate follow up appointment with the Urologist. At that time, I should have a much better idea of what is going on.

The Urologist mentioned that a 58 year old would "normally" be expected to have a PSA of about 3.5, and mine at the latest test of 3.89 is not that far off. He mentioned PSA is far from an exact science.

But given the velocity, he wants to move forward with the 3T MRI in six months, which he is certain, insurance will pay for. He mentioned his staff has become very good with the proper coding and comments needed to get it paid by insurance. I would have chosen the MRI over biopsy at this point even if insurance didn't pay a dime, remembering Marko's experience.

This plan of action is very consistent with the recommendations of those that have "been there, done that" on this board and again I thank all contributors for sharing their experiences.

Any additional comments or suggestions are welcome.

Wow - sounds like you found yourself an excellent doctor!

 

[bmcgonig]

PSA is being used for prostate cancer screening. When someone has a result that is above the agreed upon cut off and does not have prostate cancer, by definition, they have a 'false positive'. This is 75% of the 'positive' tests. Of the 25% that are 'true positives' (the men have prostate cancer), up to half of the cancers would not have caused symptoms or problems in the men's lifetime.

These are the facts. Please do not imply otherwise.

The most respected body in the United States that gives opinions on screening does not recommend routine screening for low risk men in an opinion released in May 2018. https://screeningforprostatecancer.org/

Men who have a family history of prostate cancer, have certain familial cancers in their family or are African American should be followed more closely.

It is not difficult to understand why people hold strong opinions about this but it is unreasonable not to acknowledge the serious potential harms involved in routine screening. It is heartening to hear of some who have benefited from PSA testing.

"The most respected body in the United States that gives opinions on screening does not recommend routine screening for low risk men in an opinion released in May 2018. https://screeningforprostatecancer.org/"

They don't recommend against it either. That's the point many are making. Your link says it's an individual's decision. And some individuals here are making an obviously well informed different decision than you.

 

[gamboolman]

I really appreciate this Post and all of the comments from the all of the members - as this is a very relevant subject to me at this point in life.

Age 59 and have had BPH since my early 40's.

Dad had Prostate Cancer and survived it.

Just had the finger exam and PSA done and got 5.9 as results for the PSA, the exam was the normal enlarged but felt "fine". Still waiting to talk to the Doc about it all. As others have pointed out, having sex the night prior to the test can cause some potential issues with the results.

I will admit that I am at the beginning stage of reading up and learning about this subject. It is overwhelming, abit daunting and I'll admit scary.

I really appreciate the sharing of members who have been, and are going thru this aspect of life.

I'll be watching and keeping up with this post.

Thanks, gamboolman...

 

[Richard4444]

I am 68 y o and have a PSA of 11.66 as of last month (it had been as high as 14.77 one year ago). Along the way, I have had two negative biopsies and one year ago had an MRI... crossed my fingers and it turned out to have no suspicious areas, just BPH with a 96 gram prostate (and that's very large I am told). Urologist believes that is why PSA is so high. Have been on Tamsulosin for one year (and it has helped a lot). I see urologist every 6 months and also PCP every 6 months so any jump in PSA would be explored. Although 11.66 PSA is disheartening, I can live with this knowing of my 'good' MRI result and constant checkups.

Rich

 

[target2019]

Some walk the walk. Others talk the talk.
Good luck with your journey...

 

[6miths]

"The most respected body in the United States that gives opinions on screening does not recommend routine screening for low risk men in an opinion released in May 2018. https://screeningforprostatecancer.org/"

They don't recommend against it either. That's the point many are making. Your link says it's an individual's decision. And some individuals here are making an obviously well informed different decision than you.

Well I think we will have to agree to disagree. Your statement 'obviously well informed' shows your position. The well informed decision can go either way. There are many powerful forces (read those with large amounts of money at stake) aligned with the screen everyone camp and only those with science and patient well-being in mind on the other side. To actually not recommend screening is a huge step. It is an individual decision and should be made in a fully informed manner - both on the part of patient and that of their care giver team.

 

[gamboolman]

FAL - Thanks for starting this thread.

As I said in post 110 above, since I'm at the early stage of figuring out if I have the Cancer or just BHP all the while planning to retire next year - the thread could not be more relevant to me and Ms. gamboolgal.

For me the most helpful has been posts from men and their wives who have been thru it and willing to share their experience. So much appreciation to OP for starting this thread.

PSA was 5.9 on 2-Sep-18 when Ms. gamboolgal & I got to Texas for days off. Doc had me go and give more blood for second test.

Been doing the normal reading up on the internet and consulting with Dr. Google..... some good information for sure and some miss information absolutely.

Got results from second blood test and PSA was 5.2. Doc advised I have biopsy done.

Dr. did the Needle Biopsy today.

Got to the Doc's office and got a big shot of antibiotics.

Then got nekid from waist down and lay down on table and wait for the Doc to come in and do the deed.

While laying there waiting and thinking calming thoughts......hear man groaning / screaming next office over and something heavy loudly hitting floor- and Nurse saying it's OK to scream.

Quite disconcerting.... when waiting...

On to the fun stuff. The procedure was not bad in reality. Doc greased me up and shoved what looked to me to be a Grande sized UT Probe up my butt to take the metrology and some pictures for Facebook. He then he deadened both sides of Prostate. Pain was very small and not much for the injection of the deadening stuff.

Doc took 12 samples, 6 from each side and you could feel a small electric shock / pop feeling but very small and not a big deal. Less than the deadening.

That was it - results from pathologist will be transmitted to the Doc in 7 to 10 days.

If all good news - the nurse will call to tell us.

If Cancer, Doc calls and then we come in for meeting to review prognosis.

Doc said to take it easy this afternoon and then will be able to resume normal activities. He said the sexy time can be had as soon as I can chase down & catch Ms. gamboolgal......she's fast and and slippery....

Thus far, No pain, passing small amount of blood when went to bathroom.

The health aspect is a part of FIRE - that all of us know we need to consider. But things like this make it crystal clear it will be time to go next year for us.

Especially as one of the men I worked with for years just died from the Prostate Cancer in June. He was retired less than 4 years after a lifetime in the oilpatch....dam shame...

Will post results of pathology report and what trail it looks like we'll be headed down....

Life's A Dance And You Learn As You Go....

gamboolman......

 

[Car-Guy]

FAL - T

While laying there waiting and thinking calming thoughts......hear man groaning / screaming next office over and something heavy loudly hitting floor- and Nurse saying it's OK to scream.

Quite disconcerting.... when waiting...

And that was probably because he just got the bill.

 

[Fedup]

Well I think we will have to agree to disagree. Your statement 'obviously well informed' shows your position. The well informed decision can go either way. There are many powerful forces (read those with large amounts of money at stake) aligned with the screen everyone camp and only those with science and patient well-being in mind on the other side. To actually not recommend screening is a huge step. It is an individual decision and should be made in a fully informed manner - both on the part of patient and that of their care giver team.

I’ve read that you can have cancer with low PSA and no cancer with high PSA. Make my mind wanders why the hell do we need this test anyway. Lots of falsehoods.

 

[Offgrid Organic Farmer]

Well I think we will have to agree to disagree. Your statement 'obviously well informed' shows your position. The well informed decision can go either way. There are many powerful forces (read those with large amounts of money at stake) aligned with the screen everyone camp and only those with science and patient well-being in mind on the other side. To actually not recommend screening is a huge step. It is an individual decision and should be made in a fully informed manner - both on the part of patient and that of their care giver team.

In reality we are discussing a simple blood test. If you see a doctor for an annual check-up, they will be doing a blood workup anyway. Including one additional test in the blood workup is not a big deal.

 

[Fedup]

In reality we are discussing a simple blood test. If you see a doctor for an annual check-up, they will be doing a blood workup anyway. Including one additional test in the blood workup is not a big deal.

No, they recommend a lot of stuff with it. I’ve been noticing all my doctors upsell procedures or whatever you call it.

 

[Offgrid Organic Farmer]

No, they recommend a lot of stuff with it. I’ve been noticing all my doctors upsell procedures or whatever you call it.

I do not have a full list of whatever stuff they normally test for. They fill one vial of blood and send it to their lab.

All I did was request that they add PSA onto the already long list of stuff they would normally test for.

I did not experience any 'up-sell' of what was done.

 

[aja8888]

gamboolman;

Good luck! We have a close friend who's PSA result was much, much higher than yours. No cancer after biopsy. This was a few weeks ago.

 

[Fedup]

I do not have a full list of whatever stuff they normally test for. They fill one vial of blood and send it to their lab.

All I did was request that they add PSA onto the already long list of stuff they would normally test for.

I did not experience any 'up-sell' of what was done.

Wait till you see your numbers first.

 

[braumeister]

I'm at the early stage of figuring out if I have the Cancer or just BHP.

If it helps, I've been in your situation too. My PSA has varied over the years, generally anywhere between 5 and 9, and I've had three of those biopsies (shudder). But they were all negative and my urologist feels (might be a pun there) that I'm not dealing with cancer. I just have a really big prostate gland that naturally puts out a high PSA level. You might be the same.

 

[Fedup]

If it helps, I've been in your situation too. My PSA has varied over the years, generally anywhere between 5 and 9, and I've had three of those biopsies (shudder). But they were all negative and my urologist feels (might be a pun there) that I'm not dealing with cancer. I just have a really big prostate gland that naturally puts out a high PSA level. You might be the same.

From what I’ve read, even if it’s cancer, it progresses very slowly, you might die of something else even.

On the other hand, nobody mentions, you can die of infection of the biopsy. My husband was not too keen about it. It’s his decision regarding this.
Eating eggs and meat regular does raise your PSA which he does eat.

 

[Teacher Terry]

Depends on what age you get it. My husband got it at 49 so the cancer would have killed him before something else.

 

[Car-Guy]

Depends on what age you get it. My husband got it at 49 so the cancer would have killed him before something else.

I think it may also matter on the type of prostate cancer. One type is very fast growing and tends to spread and another type is very very slow.