Dave
With regard to the latest test you had, was it done at the same lab, using the same equipment? A reading of 0.02 on a standard test could possibly be a 0.015 rounded up? even without a prostate I believe it is possible to get tiny traces of PSA that are not created by cancerous cells ... I remember Lynn Eyre once explaining that even us ladies can get a positive PSA reading under certain circumstances.
In any event without a prostate any series of consecutive rises would IMO possibly merit a return to closer monitoring. The situation becomes very unclear on exactly when any action should be taken and if it would make things any clearer if it were.
Take Chris J for instance, he knows something is making his PSA rise. In the absence of a prostate, levels of between 1 and 2 most likely means that cancerous prostate like cells or micro mets have set up camp somewhere else. The big problem is where and what can be done to find them?
I think the advancement of MRI and other imaging techniques is making it possible for a more accurate discovery of the location of such "micro mets" However they need to be big enough to be seen by these incredible scanners. At the moment that is thought to only be realistic with a PSA above 2. I presume that once the micromets are located then the combined urology/oncology team can come up with the most viable treatment options.
I know that there have been reports of very successful destruction of these micro mets using targeted treatments.
So a lot of stuff still out there should it get to that stage.
I hope someone with far more wisdom and specific knowledge than me replies to your post.
For now though try to enjoy the good times.
xx
Mo