You need to provide a lot more stats before any kind of credible response can be given. Age, PSA progression over what period of time. Your current reported set of PSA's make no sense as stated. That big of a jump over a short unknown period is not realistic.
Hi Gunter, - I believe you have erred in the report of your most recent PSA result. The < icon before the numerical digits(s) that follow ALWAYS represent that any readings, if any, were below the established reliability of the assay material used (the number following).
So in YOUR case the previous readings reported to the "thousandths" of a nanogram resulted from hyper- or Ultra-sensitive assays with reliability to .001 ng/ml. I SUSPECT that your most recent PSA report is from a STANDARD PSA test, with a reliability rating of 0.2 ng/ml, a reading in the 10th of a nanogram. IF this ASSUMPTION is true, all of your former readings AND the present result would all have been reported as LESS THAN 0.2 ng/ml (<0.2 ng/ml), IF the STANDARD PSA assay, had always been used.
The other POSSIBILITY is that, IF THE SAME assay was used as previously, the reading could have been <0.002 which would be even less reason for any concern. You should verify which of these possibilities is the case or provide another REASONABLE explanation. - John@newPCa.org (aka) az4peaks
Last edited by az4peaks; 04-25-2011 at 06:39 AM.
In any event I believe you need a very good medical oncologist that specializes in prostate cancer as G9 is high risk. The urologist is basically done after the surgery. The med-onc is the long term advisor. If you are showing recurrance then salvage radiation and/or hormone based therapy will be next. An excellent med-onc that specializes in prostate cancer is needed.