I'm interested in conversations about and I want to talk about
Know exactly what you want?
Show search

Notification

Error

Very strange PSA development.

Email this conversation Print this conversation
User
Posted 17 Dec 2022 at 21:03

Hi Everyone,


New to this site, but was wandering if anyone has an idea of what is going on here:


Had RARP May 2022, one nerve bundle had to be removed. Margins clean. Gleason 3+3


PSA before operation 7.6


PSA six weeks after operation: 0.14


One month later: 0.27


Had PET-CT scan, which was negative, urologist suggested RT.


Had a second opinion at another hospital (PSA now at 0.47) and a second PET-CT with a different (more sensitive?) tracer. Still nothing found. PSA now 0.11 ????


Two weeks later 0.06 ???


One month later 0.50, but latest PSA 0.05  ????


Both hospitals find this a very strange development. Next PSA in three months...


 

Edited by member 21 Dec 2022 at 16:16  | Reason: Trying to change title of this post.

User
Posted 17 Dec 2022 at 22:10

Peter , quite a strange pattern, the fall after the first two results looks promising, the 0.5 looks like a rogue result and results that are 10 times more that expected could be a decimal point in the wrong place.


Thanks Chris 


 

Edited by member 19 Dec 2022 at 15:24  | Reason: Not specified

User
Posted 21 Dec 2022 at 21:50

Always get your PSA readings from computer or direct printout, not by voice or phone, or hand-written on a piece of paper, etc.


I've come across far to many people in the NHS who don't understand decimal numbers (and likewise many patients). When someone tells me their PSA is 00.5 or 0.0.5 or 0.0001 or 0.001 undetectable, or many other garbage values, I just think, OK, no valid data here. Of course, there will be many transcriptions by hand which turn into an incorrect value even though potentially still a valid decimal number.


If you have digital access to your medical records, it would be worth going back through all your PSA values and checking what you were told agrees.

Show Most Thanked Posts
User
Posted 17 Dec 2022 at 22:10

Peter , quite a strange pattern, the fall after the first two results looks promising, the 0.5 looks like a rogue result and results that are 10 times more that expected could be a decimal point in the wrong place.


Thanks Chris 


 

Edited by member 19 Dec 2022 at 15:24  | Reason: Not specified

User
Posted 19 Dec 2022 at 17:38
Whoever types your notes is p****d??
User
Posted 21 Dec 2022 at 16:18

Francij1,


Not sure what you mean exactly with that, as I am not a native speaker. I am from the Netherlands.


Regards,


Peter 

User
Posted 21 Dec 2022 at 18:41
He was suggesting that the person who typed in the result was intoxicated 🙂.

Best wishes,

Chris
User
Posted 21 Dec 2022 at 20:59

Originally Posted by: Online Community Member
He was suggesting that the person who typed in the result was intoxicated


PeterSFH


For added clarification, usually followed by "as a newt/f*rt".


Other terms include bladdered, legless, three sheets to the wind, smashed, trollied, plastered, canned, sloshed, "tired and emotional", pickled, ripped and many, many more :)


As the premier lager louts of Europe, we take being drunk very seriously and have to have lots of technical terms for every situation.


On a serious note, I would agree that number sounds like a glitch. My numbers have bounced up and down, but always on a plottable curve. This sounds anomalous. The next few tests will hopefully confirm that. Perhaps a technical issue, mixed up paperwork or something like that.


Good luck!


P

User
Posted 21 Dec 2022 at 21:50

Always get your PSA readings from computer or direct printout, not by voice or phone, or hand-written on a piece of paper, etc.


I've come across far to many people in the NHS who don't understand decimal numbers (and likewise many patients). When someone tells me their PSA is 00.5 or 0.0.5 or 0.0001 or 0.001 undetectable, or many other garbage values, I just think, OK, no valid data here. Of course, there will be many transcriptions by hand which turn into an incorrect value even though potentially still a valid decimal number.


If you have digital access to your medical records, it would be worth going back through all your PSA values and checking what you were told agrees.

 
Forum Jump  
Email this conversation Print this conversation

Join the online community now.

Click through to become a member and gain access to support, information and real time replies.




MenuTop ▲
©2024 Prostate Cancer UK