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

Notification

Error

Detectable PSA after RALP

User
Posted 18 Mar 2025 at 09:58

Hi 

This is my first post and feel a bit anxious. I had my surgery in December 2022 and PSA has been undetactable since. My latest PSA came back as detectable albeit at a low 0.1, but I've had a bit of a wobble. I guess my question is:

Has anyone had expereince of PSA rising to detectable after RALP but then stabilised and didn't rise again?

Thank you,

Hywel

 

User
Posted 18 Mar 2025 at 18:29

If they're only measuring to an accuracy of 0.1, you can't really tell what's happened yet. You might have changed from 0.09 to 0.10 which is insignificant.

I seem to recall one of Lyn's men had a rise to 0.1 which then stayed there.

However, if it's a rising trend (which yours isn't - that needs 3 rising readings), it usually carries on doing so.

Edited by member 18 Mar 2025 at 18:34  | Reason: Not specified

User
Posted 18 Mar 2025 at 09:58

Hi 

This is my first post and feel a bit anxious. I had my surgery in December 2022 and PSA has been undetactable since. My latest PSA came back as detectable albeit at a low 0.1, but I've had a bit of a wobble. I guess my question is:

Has anyone had expereince of PSA rising to detectable after RALP but then stabilised and didn't rise again?

Thank you,

Hywel

 

User
Posted 20 Mar 2025 at 09:32

Hi Hyw987

There is some confusion about what 'undetectable' means: 'Undetectable' does not mean it is zero. The accuracy of the measured PSA depends on the laboratory/equipment which is used. Ideally a laboratory, when quoting a PSA, should use the sign '<'  (less than); this indicates the accuracy of the measuring instrument. Typically, when I get my result it states  < 0.003, signifying that the equipment they use is accurate to three decimal places. Quite often the term 'undetectable' is  used quite loosely, implying that it is zero.

In your case the rise from 'undetectable' to 0.1 does not give you enough information to make a judgement.  Apart from the importance of the '<' sign, it is important to watch the trend, obviously a single reading can be quite misleading. Also it is important that every time you have a PSA test the blood sample should be analysed by the same laboratory, which may not always be the case.

Incidentally, depending on the consultants/hospitals, PSA of < 0.1 or < 0.2 is often used an indicator for further treatment. 

Generally the NHS measurements are not as accurate as those provided by some of the private clinics which are super sensitive.

I suggest you have you PSA measured every three to six months and observe the trend.

 

 'Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that’s not why we do it.'                    Richard Feynman (1918-1988) Nobel Prize laureate

 

 

Show Most Thanked Posts
User
Posted 18 Mar 2025 at 18:29

If they're only measuring to an accuracy of 0.1, you can't really tell what's happened yet. You might have changed from 0.09 to 0.10 which is insignificant.

I seem to recall one of Lyn's men had a rise to 0.1 which then stayed there.

However, if it's a rising trend (which yours isn't - that needs 3 rising readings), it usually carries on doing so.

Edited by member 18 Mar 2025 at 18:34  | Reason: Not specified

User
Posted 19 Mar 2025 at 20:16

Alas my PSA didn't fall below 0.36 after my RALP in Dec 2022 - been rising slowly and now at 2.9. Another PSMA scan arranged for next week.

User
Posted 20 Mar 2025 at 09:32

Hi Hyw987

There is some confusion about what 'undetectable' means: 'Undetectable' does not mean it is zero. The accuracy of the measured PSA depends on the laboratory/equipment which is used. Ideally a laboratory, when quoting a PSA, should use the sign '<'  (less than); this indicates the accuracy of the measuring instrument. Typically, when I get my result it states  < 0.003, signifying that the equipment they use is accurate to three decimal places. Quite often the term 'undetectable' is  used quite loosely, implying that it is zero.

In your case the rise from 'undetectable' to 0.1 does not give you enough information to make a judgement.  Apart from the importance of the '<' sign, it is important to watch the trend, obviously a single reading can be quite misleading. Also it is important that every time you have a PSA test the blood sample should be analysed by the same laboratory, which may not always be the case.

Incidentally, depending on the consultants/hospitals, PSA of < 0.1 or < 0.2 is often used an indicator for further treatment. 

Generally the NHS measurements are not as accurate as those provided by some of the private clinics which are super sensitive.

I suggest you have you PSA measured every three to six months and observe the trend.

 

 'Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that’s not why we do it.'                    Richard Feynman (1918-1988) Nobel Prize laureate

 

 

 
Forum Jump  
©2025 Prostate Cancer UK