This forum is for the discussion of anything to do with Prostate Cancer. There are only four rules:
No fundraisers, no commercials (although it is OK to recommend choices of treatment or medical people based on your personal research; invitations to participate in third-party surveys are also acceptable, provided there is no compensation to YANA);
No harvesting e-mail addresses for Spam;
No insults or flaming - be polite and respectful at all times and understand that there may be a variety of points of view, all of which may have some validity;
Opinions are OK, but please provide as much factual evidence as possible for any assertions that you are making
Failure to abide by these simple rules will result in the immediate and permanent suspension of your posting privileges.
Since this is an International Forum, please specify your location in your post.
Thank you Frank i had a bone scan for a couple of reasons 1st i never had one and for piece of mind as since surgery i woke from surgery 10 mth ago with bad shoulder pain.I was told it would go away buy it hasn't no one can tell me what it is.And i was worried about my PSA going up.How are you going i hope you are well pls stay in touch.
Frank's note made me realise that perhaps I had neglected to check on the accuracy of my notes about the accuracy of the PSA test!
I would welcome any input on this subject, but from a brief search I have not found anything that indicates a significant improvement in results.
I did find some interesting studies though.
One deals with the problem of different results from different manufacturer's tests is set out below. This is a long standing problem and efforts to 'standardise' PSA assays were initiated in 1992 at the First Stanford Conference. There was some limited agreement then, but the debate still continues. What I didn't realise was just how many different assays there were. One study refers to 28 PSA assays from 22 manufacturers; another to 26 assays from 18 companies. And none of these assays consistently agree.
One study, published in 2007 says this in the published Abstract:
“……results from different assays are still not interchangeable, a situation that is only likely to improve once broad recommendations can be made about the most clinically relevant antibody combinations. Universal implementation of such recommendations would almost certainly improve between-method agreement substantially, provided careful attention were paid to assay design and use of appropriately pure secondary standards ensured.”
In my world, if no agreement has been reached in the 20 years since the first efforts were made, they’re not likely to be made in the near future.
Another study I came across was intended to “… determine the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) velocity, PSA slope, and PSA doubling time (PSADT) in men ….. and to use this information to improve the test characteristics in the early detection of prostate cancer and provide normal values for these parameters in screened men with and without evidence of prostate cancer.”
The study outcome was
The mean values of PSA velocity, PSA slope, and PSADT in a rescreened population differed significantly between men with and without prostate cancer. However, in predicting the biopsy outcome, the PSA dynamics were of limited value.