Hi John. No, don't worry. I believe that any "zero" PSA result is an informal, reported value and not the value on the actual written report from the lab. Any PSA test will have a lower detection limit (LDL). For example, Labcorp's LDL for its most sensitive PSA test is 0.006, so if their analyzer detects nothing it means simply that the sample could have been a true zero (e.g. if water had been submitted and there really wasn't any PSA) or that there was PSA, but its concentration was below 0.006 ng/mL. Labcorp never reports 0, but rather <0.006, i.e., the LDL of the test preceded by the less than sign.

IMO your five years of JH values were below that test's LLDL and were reported to you as a "zero". Did you get an actual lab report, a transcribed value, or a verbal communication? Without knowing your actual previous values, you don't know if your current PSA if 0.01 is the same, slightly higher, or slightly lower than your last JH value. Even if there were a difference, it could be due to differences between the tests and that your PSA didn't change,

I think a "zero" means "essentially zero" and makes is way indirectly to the patient as a "not to worry" value, but it is not a true analytical one. It's best that you stay with your current lab and test if possible -- that way you'll be able to track your PSA going forward. With small PSA values, the values and fluctuations themselves are not as important as catching an upward trend; however, this requires a number of data points over time.

That's my take, at least.

Djin

John, as Djni said, your PSA seems like nothing to be concerned withyou dont mention your gleason score, or whether there were any adverse findings in your surgical pathology, in your signature.
Regardless, i would think i'd want to stick to a one year testing schedule for at least a while longer. Lots can happen in 2 years and you dont want to miss anything. Speak to your Dr about your concerns, if one year testing will give you more peace of mind i'm sure he would agree to it.

P.S. It occurs to me that if he is suggesting 2 year testing your pathology was probably pristine. Still, i would feel more comfortable with annual. But thats me.