Update on stats

Hi again,

I posted last night after finding out dad's psa levels are up.

His original March 2010 diagnosis was Gleason 7, T2, localized.

He had radical prostatectomy May 2010, no positive margins etc.

His post of psa tests have been 0.2, 0.06, now a year later it is back to 0.2.

What could this indicate? He has his oncology appointment in June (on his 60th birthday......).

Any interpretations are welcome ...thanks.

Kmac...I'm not too sure either but a .2 is nothing to get too worried about. It will give you a lot of time to get ready for his June appt. to find out whats up. maybe some SRT could be helpful but I believe most Docs will wait until it gets to 1.0 or more from what I read on this forum. Good Luck, Chris

Thanks very much for your replies.
When I posted again it was nice to see your familiar names too.
He has an appointment with the leading prostate cancer guy in the country and brought the first davinci machine to Oz so he will be in good hands.
It's just the waiting game and unknown isn't?!
I have no idea how you all deal with it and manage to help others in the process.

kmac, David nailed it.

What he said was exactly what I was thinking before I scrolled down and read his post.

For myself, I have to admit any "help" I may offer to others here isn't all altruistic. There is a feedback loop that in helping others (at least I hope I somethimes do) I also help myself.

I was looking into airfares for Oz today. It's on my bucket list. Twice I've been headed there only to have family members die. Needless to say, family is NOT keen on my planning another trip! However, I'm determined to go. I've got a notch in my belt for the two Americas, Europe, Asia, Africa and Antarctica. Oz will give me all seven. Not the highest peak on each by any means, but some great "watering holes."

And, I echo David's comment to please let us know about your dad.

Sheldon AKA Sleepless

My latest confusion with pca is the use of radiation and hormone therapy....which comes first, or are they used in combination?

it really depends on where you are at.  i had hormone therapy as a first of three treatments initially.  with what i know now i'd be talking to a radiation oncologist ASAP if i were in your position.  i could see straight radiation or perhaps HT first and then radiation.  i'd opt for the latter.  the best to you.

ed

 

Thanks ed :)
I would have dad see someone tomorrow if I could but his earliest vacancy is June and his dr didn't stress urgency. Plus he is in the 'outback' so distance is also an issue.

Sleepless: I lived in rainy Vancouver, but got to see a nice chunk of the east and west coast. I ran out of time (and $$) to see the middle unfortunately.