Post-treatment monitoring

Nancy Ferrari

Senior editor, Harvard Health

Today the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening test is often the first indicator that cancer may be present in the prostate gland. The usefulness of PSA testing, however, is not confined to the initial screening and decision making. After treatment, PSA monitoring is the primary tool for measuring treatment success and for detecting early signs of cancer recurrence.

The PSA value and its velocity (its rate of change over time) are valuable tools for assessing options for further treatment. You will continue to have regular PSA tests throughout life as an early-warning system to detect residual or recurrent disease. Let’s not forget that a significant percentage of men with a normal PSA will have an abnormal digital rectal exam (DRE), and both should be done!

PSA levels after treatment for localized disease

Once a man is diagnosed with early-stage prostate cancer and treated surgically by radical prostatectomy, his PSA level should drop to undetectable levels — zero nanograms per milliliter (ng/ml) — since the entire gland has been removed. In men who have not been diagnosed with prostate cancer, a PSA of 4 ng/ml or more may trigger a biopsy. (In healthy men, there is really no “normal” level of PSA; increasing numbers indicate a continuum of risk.) In a man who has already undergone treatment for prostate cancer, any detectable PSA level signifies a problem. Neither the physician nor the patient should have a false sense of security if the PSA is 2 or 3 ng/ml. It means that the patient has residual or recurrent prostate cancer. Often, the PSA is the first harbinger of recurrent disease, even though it may predate any symptoms or clinical evidence of the disease by months or years.

For the patient treated with radiation, the evaluation is a bit more complex. Often the value does drop to zero. If, however, the value is 1 or 2 ng/ml, it may be the case that some of the normal prostate tissue survived radiation treatment and is still producing PSA. If the value continues to rise, there is reason to be concerned that either cancer has spread outside the gland or the radiation treatment did not eradicate the cancer within the gland. Recent studies have shown that for optimal results, PSA levels should be lower than 1 ng/ml, and even lower than 0.5 ng/ml. Levels that are above 1 or 2 ng/ml 12 to 18 months following completion of radiation treatments are very worrisome, because they indicate that the cancer may not have been eradicated.

Unlike the situation in which patients have an elevated PSA value following radical prostatectomy, patients who have been treated with radiation therapy are probably more likely to have residual rather than metastatic disease — cancer that was not eradicated by the treatment and survives in the prostate gland itself. The best management of these cases is unclear, particularly when the only evidence of disease is the elevated PSA. The physician’s responsibility is to treat the patient, not the lab value, yet often patients in this situation are too worried to accept an approach of active surveillance.

Melvin Parks is a 72-year-old retired African American who in 1987 had a diagnosis of a stage T2a, Gleason 3 + 3 cancer. He opted for definitive radiation treatments, which were completed without complications. His initial PSA was 14 ng/ml, and reverted to normal several months after he completed his radiation treatments. About four years later, his PSA, which was in the 1–1.5 ng/ml range, started slowly creeping up. His value is now 7 ng/ml. He has been extensively evaluated with repeat abdominal computed tomography (CT) scans, bone scans, transrectal ultrasound, and physical exams, including a DRE. There is no evidence of detectable metastatic disease.

While there are several potential diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, which include biopsy of the prostatic fossa (the area in which the prostate gland is located), initiation of hormonal treatments, and cryosurgery, Mr. Parks opted to “hold tight” and monitor the rate of the PSA rise. Is it possible that the slow and very modest rise in the PSA could be due to normal prostate tissue? This is very doubtful. However, given the slow rate of rise, it is possible that many years may pass before active intervention is necessary for either local disease control or disseminated disease management. In general, doctors now look at PSA doubling time before making any treatment decisions. If Mr. Parks’ PSA should double within a period of several months to a year, then treatment may be considered. But if the doubling time takes longer than a year, it is more likely that he will be advised to continue monitoring the PSA.

On rare occasions, an area of recurrence can be detected during a rectal examination as the only evidence of recurrent or residual disease following radiation treatments. Under these circumstances, and in very special situations, a “salvage” radical prostatectomy may be an option. This procedure is difficult to do and should be attempted only by experienced surgeons, since the complication rates can be significant. As the late Dr. William Fair, former chief of urology at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, pointed out, for this procedure the patient needs to be braver than the surgeon! This is a very difficult operation because the radiation treatments eliminate the “anatomic landmarks” that the surgeon depends on to know where important nerves and blood vessels lie. It is difficult to locate the normal planes of tissue to be dissected, and there is often a great deal of diffuse bleeding that is hard to control. Nonetheless, for the patient with a focal, anatomically limited recurrence, plus a reluctance to undergo long-term hormonal treatments, it may be a possibility.

Another option for patients who have developed recurrent or residual cancer after radiation therapy is to administer three to six months of hormonal therapy and then consider a radical prostatectomy. Complications do occur but may be minimized if the patient received 3-D conformal radiation treatments (which minimize damage to surrounding tissues) in the past.

This course of action was not considered in Mr. Parks’ case because he had no clear-cut evidence of a localized recurrence. We have continued to monitor him for signs of progression, with periodic bone scans, CT scans, and prostate biopsies. In all likelihood, he will elect to receive hormonal treatment, but in cases such as his, it is unclear how long the hormonal therapy should be continued. Prolonged hormonal therapy does result in loss of sexual desire and potency for the duration of the treatments. In addition, early, continuous therapy could encourage the development of resistance to hormonal therapy in the surviving tumor cells, so a shorter course of therapy or intermittent hormonal therapy may be preferable.

Monitoring the patient with a “positive margin”

Daniel Husik, a 58-year-old teacher, faced an all-too-common issue shared by large numbers of men treated surgically for localized prostate cancer. Mr. Husik was monitored annually with a DRE. In 1988, his physician noted a small “ridge.” A PSA test was 6.4 ng/ml, and several months later, returned as 6.5 ng/ml. A biopsy showed a Gleason 3 + 3 score. All other staging evaluations were negative and a radical prostatectomy was scheduled. His postoperative course was noteworthy for two events. There was an excessive amount of bleeding postoperatively, requiring intensive care for 24 hours after the operation; and there was a pathologic finding of a positive margin — in this case, microscopic cancer in the area of the urethral anastomosis, the part of the urethra that is cut and then reconnected during the prostatectomy.

This is one example of a so-called positive margin. The borders or margins of the surgically removed gland can be positive for cancer in any one of several places and, when this is detected, pose a particular dilemma for treatment after the operation. The surgeon strives to structure the operation so that the cancer is contained within the boundaries of the prostate gland when it is removed. The problem with a positive margin is that even though the cancerous area is microscopic, it is found at the cut margin of the gland. This implies that on the margin that was not removed from the patient, additional cancer cells may lurk. Most experts agree that the patient with a positive margin is likely to have a recurrence of the cancer, but the big questions remain:

  1. When will such a recurrence take place?
  2. Where in the body is the recurrence likely to occur — will the cancer recur as an extension of the localized disease, or will it metastasize?
  3. Can anything be done pre-emptively (in the immediate postoperative period) to minimize the risk of a recurrence?
  4. If something can be done, what should it be — postoperative radiation to the area of the positive margin? More surgical removal of the area containing the positive margin thought to be left in the patient? Hormonal treatments? Cryosurgery?
  5. Can the PSA help guide physicians in these circumstances?

The likelihood that a recurrence will take place is very high. The recurrence may take three to eight years to show up clinically — that is, as disease that can be detected by DRE, diagnostic tests, or scans. Unfortunately, there is no way of knowing if that recurrence is going to manifest itself in the area of the prostate gland, or in lymph nodes or bone. The location may be important in determining the type of treatment. For example, if the recurrence is limited to a small area in the prostate region, a small field of radiation treatments may be offered. In certain circumstances, a small local recurrence in the prostate area years after the original surgery can be successfully treated with another surgical procedure. If, however, the cancer manifests itself as a recurrence in the bones with no evidence of recurrence in the prostate region, a systemic approach would be more appropriate, since the presence of the cancer in the bones or other distant site would be best treated by hormonal therapy.

Let’s return to Mr. Husik as we untangle the answers to questions 3, 4, and 5. Treatment options for patients with a positive surgical margin have been debated for years. Some physicians advise observation only while others undertake active treatment interventions such as postoperative radiation treatments or systemic treatments with hormonal agents. Unfortunately, there are no convincing data to support the use of any of the active modalities; hence, many physicians would wait for the recurrence to manifest itself. By following the PSA value, we can get good assessment of whether a recurrence has taken place.

When the PSA rises following a radical prostatectomy, with or without a known positive margin, the general approach is to “restage” the patient with a DRE, an MRI, a bone scan, and an abdominal pelvic CT scan. An ultrasound exam may provide some useful information, especially if there is a discrete localized recurrence in the area previously operated on, but sometimes it is too insensitive to show anything.

If there is no definite area of recurrence yet the PSA is rising, as it was in Mr. Husik, a patient is generally anxious for active intervention. In this particular case, we opted to treat the prostate bed (the area in the pelvis from which the prostate gland was removed) with doses of radiation therapy. While one could argue that the recurrence as manifested by the rising PSA may be coming from some other area, in this case, the PSA did return to normal several months after the completion of the radiation treatments and has stayed down.

An alternative approach would have been to initiate treatment with hormonal therapy. The idea here is that a rising PSA in a postprostatectomy patient almost always means the persistence of prostate cancer cells, even though they are undetectable by conventional testing. Because the cells may be lurking anywhere in the body, systemic hormonal treatments have the best chance of eliminating them. In the otherwise asymptomatic patient in whom it has taken several years for the PSA to go from undetectable to a level of 1 or 2 ng/ml, however, hormonal therapy and its attendant side effects may be too intensive a treatment.

Often, patients with an elevated PSA without any abnormalities on restaging evaluation will be “watched” for something to happen. This could be in the form of a bone scan turning from negative to positive, or evidence of a suspicious metastatic deposit shown on a CT scan. Another option is to biopsy the prostatic fossa (bed) even in the absence of palpable disease. If the biopsy is positive, the patient can receive radiation; if negative, systemic hormonal treatments can be considered, or the patient may opt to wait and get no active treatment. In the end, the treatment decision is made with the joint participation of the physician, patient, and family members. It should be made after a full discussion of the various options, side effects, and other issues of quality of life.

For the patient who has regained or maintained his sexual activity after the operation, treatment with hormonal therapy is very likely to eliminate both sexual desire and performance. Radiation therapy following prostatectomy often decreases sexual activity if given after the operation, but less certainly or severely than hormonal therapy. Mr. Husik was indeed sexually active after the operation. When his PSA went up ever so slightly from 0 ng/ml after the operation to 1.3 ng/ml nearly four to five years later, he was just too uncomfortable with accepting a policy of observation. Even though his restaging studies were normal, we decided on a program of radiation therapy. The treatment was remarkably well tolerated and did not interfere with any of his daily functions, including sexual relations with his wife. (This is unusual. Most men should not expect to be sexually active when radiation treatments follow prostatectomy.)

PSA monitoring for more advanced disease

Alfred Owens is a 70-year-old retired technician who in October 1993 was found to have both an elevated PSA value of 55 ng/ml and an enlarged prostate gland. A prostate biopsy showed a Gleason pattern carcinoma of 4 + 3. On staging evaluation with abdominal-pelvic CT scan, enlargement of the seminal vesicles was suspected. In the view of his physicians, this suspected enlargement, coupled with both the physical appearance of the gland and the elevated PSA, was strong enough evidence of stage T3 disease. The physicians recommended hormonal therapy and did not consider either radiation or surgery as options. Mr. Owens was placed on combination hormonal treatment with an LHRH analogue and an anti-androgen, which was well tolerated except for total loss of sexual activity.

When I consulted with Mr. Owens in July 1994, I found his prostate gland had returned to a normal size and showed no evidence of hardness or nodules. His PSA was less than 1 ng/ml, and a repeat CT scan demonstrated completely normal seminal vesicles. These findings led us to treat him with post-hormonal radiation therapy, with the hope that the hormonal treatments may have eradicated micrometastatic disease and the prostate cancer within his gland. We would not have considered the addition of radiation treatments had the PSA still been markedly elevated.

At the time, the combination hormonal therapy plus the addition of radiation therapy was considered investigational; today it has become the standard of care. Mr. Owens completed radiation treatments with only some mild discomfort with bowel movements but none of the severe radiation-treatment side effects. He had been told that his disease was incurable. He may still have a recurrence, but he is doing much better than anyone predicted at the time of his diagnosis, and his prognosis, based on his clinical stage, may have been too gloomy. The combination of modalities may have actually eradicated his prostate cancer or retarded its growth in such a fashion as to improve Mr. Owens’ quality of life and his ultimate survival. This, after all, is the goal of treatment.

Reprinted with permission from Marc B. Garnick, M.D., The Patient’s Guide to Prostate Cancer: An Expert’s Successful Treatment Strategies and Options (New York: Penguin Group, 1996), Chapter 11.

Comments:

  1. Mike

    I had my prostatectomy in March of this year. I just had my first PSA and the results came back 0.10. The Doctor said I just needed to come back in six months for another PSA. Does that make sense? Should the next PSA be sooner? Does anyone know what concerns I should have at this time?

  2. Tony

    Tony

    50 y.o., PSA 11 – 12 core biopsy all clear
    1 year later PSA 13 – another 12 core biopsy all clear
    On Finasteride PSA 12
    18 mo. later PSA 8
    7 years later PSA 67
    Pre-surgery PSA 72
    3T MRI & Fusion Biopsy show Gleason 4+3 half of cores have cancer
    Radical, Open,nerve-sparing Prostatechtomy & lymphadenectomy
    3 mo. later PSA 0.1
    There is always hope!

  3. Gina

    My husband had Gleason 4. We opted gor radiation. They even said we could wait. He did 44 radiation treatments and his PSA is now 132. Yes 132. They have never seen a number so high. Ct abdomen and bone scan today.

  4. James Hudson

    I had a radical prostate cancer surgery about 10 years ago. My PSA has been very low and acceptable since. They have now found a small mass on my left leg just below and to the left of my knee. I am worried about cancer again. Would a PSA test show any sign of cancer in the mass? They said they could cut the mass out and biopsy it or just leave it and see if it grows. I wouldn’t mind waiting if I knew it was not cancerous. Thanks…

  5. Martin

    Excuse me, that’s 0.6 to 0.2…

  6. Martin

    In November 2013 I had radical prostectomy after a PSA of 38 and 35, Gleason at first 3+4, then reversed? After surgery PSA dropped to under 1 which shocked the docs… But I underwent radiation in May of 2015 for it began creeping up. After that with hormone therapy it dropped from .06 to .02. Since then its been <0.04, <0.04, and now <0.06. What does the < mean even at 0.06?

  7. Barbara Snow Bryant

    Similar to Laura, my husband 75 had prostate removed several years ago. A week ago, when he had a blood test PSA had jumped from 0 to 2. 4 days later at his urologist , it had jumped to 3.2. This eems terribly frightening.

  8. Laura domney

    My dad had prostrate removed then radiotherapy he’s now 78 and his psa stared going up a bit so went on hormonal injections his psa was kept at similar amount for a while but has started 2 in crease a lot he is having bone scans but nothing is showing up can anyone give me any information on it

  9. Zorro

    For 42 months my psa values AFTER my Da Vince prostatectomy varried from forty-five (3 weeks post-op) to 1.94 with a nadir now of say five.PET scan done on 30 August 2017 showed no cancer

  10. Margarette Jerome

    10 months ago my husband had the robotic prostatectomy. Since the surgery he is complaining of abdominal/pelvic pain, incontinence,erectile disfunction. He was told by the surgeon the nerves are preserve and he was free of cancer.The first psa after surgery was 0.1, second psa 0.1, 10 months later it is 4.5. I am really nervous about this. He is not getting better, always in pain after this robotic surgery.What to do next? Please help us.

  11. dupre

    i had prostate remove in 2011 after that psa grew up to 010 0.15.030 then i went under radiotherapy and psa level went back to 0.10 all this in 5 years…then lately psa went to 1.65 and 3 months after 4.85 so my dr decided to go hormonal treatment..
    this is 2 month and half ago and surprise last week my psa drop to 0.04 BUT i fast many days and take b17, artemisa annua, huang qin,
    vitamine c liposaomal and tumeric ..selenium germanium and few other product capsicaine hemp oil reservatrol and few little vitamine my kitchen is a laboratory my wife help me thanks god
    i am writing this because i have feeling that this can be of help to some people myscore on gleason was 4/6 and my psa was 7.80 before operation now i had a scan before starting hormonotheray and some metastasis were discover so i am waiting 3 to 4 months before making an other pet scan good luck and courage to every one regards

  12. David

    What is the half life of PSA? If production of the antigen was interrupted how quickly should the level fall? Usually if the level is to be retested it is done with a one month time frame. Is one month a better indicator than 14 days?
    Thank you

  13. Leonard Hobbs

    I was positive for prostate CA, treated with radiation and no surg. due to a femoral bypass. My last 0.4. When should I be rechecked. I am 5 yrs post. radiation.

  14. Wassil N Rascheeff

    P.S. I was diagnosed in August 2007 with PSA 6.6 and Gleason 3+4, 4+3 and 4+4.

  15. Wassil N Rascheeff

    February 14th, 2017
    I am 72 and had radiotherapy completed in March 2008. The PSA Nadir 0.01, January 2016 0.60 and June 2016 was 1.23. Double in less than 6 months. Started Biculutamide 50mg every day -> reduced the PSA to 0.20 within a month, than the doses was reduced to 50mg every second day. This kept the PSA steady for app 12months. Than it started creeping up, increased to 0.39 within 2 months. At this junction the doses was increased to 50mg/day and the PSA drooped to 0.14 within a month. Now I am advised to stop altogether the biculatamide, because according to the international benchmark, Nadir + 2.0, there is no sure evidence for reoccurance. I will stop the biculatamide and continue monitoring the PSA on monthly bases. Your opinion about the most life extension path forward will be greatly appreciated.

  16. ferdinand marganon

    i have robotic surgery or deviance , they remove my prostate ,any ways after the surgery doctor told me not to hurry all margin were clear as the node no evidence they were ok ,so my surgery after a month went check my p s a it shows 1.3 am very scare don’t know what to think or do ,doctor have send me pet scan for next week he said it migth been something in blood bra bra ,so if there is anybody that can guide me it will be greatly appreciated thank you and God bless you if any one wants to call me 2396287567 my surgery was on december 2016

  17. ferdinand marganon

    i have robotic surgery or deviance , they remove my prostate ,any ways after the surgery doctor told me not to hurry all margin were clear as the node no evidence they were ok ,so my surgery after a month went check my p s a it shows 1.3 am very scare don’t know what to think or do ,doctor have send me pet scan for next week he said it migth been something in blood bra bra ,so if there is anybody that can guide me it will be greatly appreciated thank you and God bless you if any one wants to call me 2396287567

  18. Paul G Shaw

    I had a Radical Prostesctomy on 2/11/16…. PSA prior to surgery was 7.7…MRI & Bone Scans prior to surgery showed no evidence of problems outside the Prostate. My Histology show the Cancer to be within the capsule with negative margins, removed lymph nodes and seminal vessels were also clear…..now the mystery ….at 6 weeks post op my PSA was 2.9…..3 weeks later it had dropped to 2.5….my Surgeon says he has only seen this twice in the last 5 years and he reckons that I am one of those rare people that take far longer to wash existing PSA out of my blood system. Further MRI & PET scans have been booked just to see if anything is going on that hasn’t been spotted……anyone else come across this before ?……..

    • Mark Merriam

      Had my prostatectomy in Oct 2017. My PSA 7 weeks after was .77, a couple weeks later .68, a month after that it was. 48, then yesterday (roughly 5 months post-op) it was .60. Not finding much data/info on this type of situation or what others have experienced.

  19. ac stout

    I has a RPT in December of 2002 – results were no lymph node involvement, no seminal vesicle involvement, negative maring, Gleason 3 + 4.

    My PSA remained undetectable until 2014, when it rose to .06 – since then, it has, except for one drop, steadily risen to .17…

    My surgeon from Mayo Clinic says…do nothing until it gets to .4 – historically, he says, .4 to .6 can still be benign, and still treatable. My doctors here in Boise aren’t like-minded… especially the radiological oncologists… who insist radiation MUST begin at .2 – even though they admit that they are shooting in the dark to irradiate the prostate bed… it is simply a “best guess.” What are some of your experiences?

  20. Ronald Lynn

    PSA of 9.97 biopsy showed cancer in all 12 cores. Gleason of 3-3 to 4-3 Treatment of 45 days of radiation and hormone shot. 30 days after radiation treatment PSA test is .012 Is this low PSA common, rare, or very rare. Does this low number increase the chance of being cured?

  21. Jim williams

    I’m 80 years old and my doctor wants to retest my psa results.my prostate was removed 22 years ago and have never had a positive report???? Does this make sense???

  22. Jim williams

    My prostate was removed 22 years ago I am now 80 years old and had a psa test with a negative resultfirst time in 22 years???
    I’m confused .

  23. Zorro

    I did have a history of watchfull waiting.My urologist told me that I am only buying time with watchfull waiting and sometime he has to do something for me.He told me the cancer normally develop between 3 and 6 years.

  24. Oscar Soliz

    Preoperative I was told I had a 100 percent chance of a cure if we acted quickly. Five weeks later, I had a radical robotic prostatectomy including lymph nodes and extended margins. How long after surgery do I have wait to have my adjuvant radiation therapy?

  25. Bob Chapel

    Zorro….

    I am VERY confused as to why you had a radical prostatectomy?? You say your dissected prostate showed no signs of cancer… A gleason of 6 indicates that cancer is present…though certainly not likely a worrisome level unless all the cores were positive( and you don’t break down the score…3+3 ?? I know that I would never have had definitive treatment with your numbers…

  26. Zorro

    In some patients the medial lob of the prostate grows into the bladderwall.With open surgery the urologist usually see it, but with the Da Vince robotic prostatectomy it is possible that the urologist can overlook it.This may lead to confusing psa results.In my case my last psa result one day before surgery was only 2.37.My first psa 3 weeks post-op was forty-five, psa at 6 weeks was 17.At 9 months psa was a happy 2.4.At 12 months psa was a terrifying 7.7.Now at 24 months my psa is a stable 4.3.I never received radiotherapy and I am still refusing it, nor any other treatment accept for antibiotics and anti inflammatory tablets.But remember there was never any cancer found in my dissected prostate and my gleason score was 6 and my stage T1c.

  27. Fred Einstein

    I am a 58 year old whose prostate was removed 5 months ago by the DaVinci procedure. My PSA is 0.0 thank God. However, my urologist had a “Decipher” test done on my removed prostate (BTW: MAKE SURE THAT THE DECIPHER LAB IS IN-NETWORK ON YOUR HEALTH PLAN!!!! IT WAS OUT OF NETWORK ON MINE AND I’M STUCK WITH A $2000 BILL!!!!) and that test indicated that I have a high rate of recurrence — my Decipher score was .68).

    Now my doctor recommends radiation, even though my PSA is 0.0!!!

    My decision is to watch my PSA, having it done every 3 months and if it ever shows any rise to have radiation then.

    Any other opinions?

  28. patrick turner

    Patrick Turner
    Who knows anything about getting TWO lots of RT to a PG???
    I’m 68, diagnosed Gleason 9 in 2009, Psa 6, had attempted open op but this failed, then HT, then EBRT in 2010. HT continued, but Psa now about 2.0.
    No mets found with MPSA and PET scans exceot in 2 upper lymphs. A doc wants to try Calypso RT with RF beacons and gel and maybe 70Gy level for PG, so this increases total levels to PG to above 140Gy, maybe high enough to kill my Pca deemed to be RT resistant.
    I worry prostatic urethra will be damaged, and maybe bigger op needed to remove bladder, PG, then make stoma for ureters from kidneys. All intelligent comments welcomed.
    Regards to all, Patrick Turner.

  29. carrie vincent

    Thank God Almighty that lead me to Dr Al-Jamali in Dubai, My brother lungs cancer has been cured by Dr Al-Jamali. My brother has been through chemo 3 times, but this time his condition was getting worse that I was afraid it will kill him. When a friend of mine directed me to Dr Al-Jamali at: (drjamaliremedycenter@gmail.com ) where I could buy the medication from, because the Dr Al-Jamali has help cured his own Brain tumor and he strongly recommend that he would helped me with my brother cancer and cure it completely, I never believed the story, but today, with thanks giving in my heart, My brother lungs cancer has been cured within the Dr Al-Jamali hemp oil and I want you all to join hands in appreciation of the great work that is been done by Dr Mahmood Al-Jamali , he is the man that saved the life of my brother with hemp oil, thanks to him. for all those who have problem relating to cancer and other diseases should contact him through his emai(drjamaliremedycenter@gmail.com) I’ll keep thanking him because his God sent to save my family that was at the stage of collapsing all because of my brother cancer, if you have cancer is time to save your life thanks everyone again bye.

  30. Tim Skinner

    I am 68 years old. I had a radical prostectomy in 1996. My PSA level dropped to non-detect for 5 years. In 2001, my PSA raised to .24. I underwent radiation for 7 weeks and my PSA has been measured as <008 until this summer when I got a result of .009. A PSA test 6 months later gave the result of .02. I know a different lab is being used recently. My urologist said I should not be concerned. I have anther test scheduled in 3 months. How concerned should I be? My Gleason score originally was 3+3.

  31. A Goldstein

    Shouldn’t there be an update to this post with a discussion of genetic and other biomarker testing of prostate tissue samples as well as new blood tests? I have read that there are enough data to suggest that these findings are useful in determining the cancer’s aggressiveness. Patients need all the help they can get to help make the “best” treatment decisions based on probabilities of recurrence.

  32. Gregory Lock

    I am 78 years old and had a Da Vinci assisted prostate-ectomy in early July 2015. Since then my follow up PSA tests have been 2.1 and 2.4. My surgeon will have it tested again in 4 weeks to help determine a follow up course of action, but he has already floated the possibility of hormone therapy. I trust him, but am worried about the possibility that it has somehow metastasized and would like to know if a second opinion would be a good idea.

  33. john cole

    It is 2 years post Ibrt with gleason scale 4 +2. 44 treatments. At first psa went down to 0 now last 4 tests are in the mid to high 2’s.iam also presenting with moderately enlarged prostate. I have also aquired renal cysts one of which slthough small and stable is still enhancing. Im having bsck Surgery lumbar fusion diskectomy etc. Mri shows back damage increased 10 fold in 9 months. Could this hsve something to do with perhsps some hidden metatasized process.

  34. Robert Gleason

    20 Months on no PSA levels after my Prostectemy now my PSA levels appear now what?

    • rita

      I will tell you to followed the other way round, their this Dr that treated this diseases herb way. I have try it work for v, when I went back to hospital Dr confirm am now free and I have been enjoying my, I will want to meet him, is Dr Omo . but his email is dromoebosele@gmail
      .com please you should try and contact him I know how it look been on that condition, this the help I guest I can render

Commenting has been closed for this post.