A 45-year-old man in excellent health with no family history of prostate cancer had a screening PSA done three years ago which was in the range of 4.0 ng/mL. He has been followed by a urologist, and the test was repeated several times without much change.
In June of this year, his PSA was 4.6 and the free PSA was 0.6 for a ratio of 0.13. He was given a course of antibiotics for presumed prostatitis, and repeat testing a month later showed a PSA of 3.8 with a free PSA of 0.5. Because the PSA was less than 4, a ratio was not calculated.
The patient obtained copies of the reports. The from June one states the following: "When total PSA is in the range of 4.0-10.0 ng/mL, a free PSA/total PSA ratio of less than or equal to 0.10 indicates a 49% to 65% risk of prostate cancer depending on age. A free PSA/total PSA ratio of greater than 0.25 indicates a 9% to 16% risk of prostate cancer depending on age." It does not comment on the significance of a ratio of 0.13, which I have looked up. The cancer risk is in the area of 20%-25%. However, no source gave estimates for men under the age of 50.
On examination, his urologist can feel no nodules. He has recommended that the patient undergo an MRI of the prostate.
Stating that an MRI is not indicated in a man of his age with his history, the patients insurance company will not pay for the test and suggested a trans-rectal ultrasound. The urologist advised the patient not to have an ultrasound due to his age and the potential for complications. A hospital quoted him an out-of-pocket price of $2500 for the MRI.
The urologist has told him that random biopsies may not be accurate and there is a risk of complications.
When he had his first PSA done three years ago, I had expressed surprise and wondered why it had been offered to him. The patient said his internist told him he should have the test.
He is concerned about these recent results and has asked me for advice which I am not qualified to give.
What would you advise?
Follow-up August 6, 2014
Numerous urologists responded on Twitter with more than 60 tweets about this post. Suggestions for the next step were as follows: trans-rectal ultrasound (TRUS) and biopsy as mentioned by Dr. Cooperberg below; going ahead with the MRI; repeating the PSA in 3 months; go for a second opinion by a recognized expert in prostate cancer.
One urologist emailed me to point out that even if the patient has cancer, it is probably not an aggressive type because his PSA has not risen in 3 years.
Another urologist gave me the name of an expert in the patients geographic area.
The patient has already scheduled an appointment for a second opinion.
Read More..
In June of this year, his PSA was 4.6 and the free PSA was 0.6 for a ratio of 0.13. He was given a course of antibiotics for presumed prostatitis, and repeat testing a month later showed a PSA of 3.8 with a free PSA of 0.5. Because the PSA was less than 4, a ratio was not calculated.
The patient obtained copies of the reports. The from June one states the following: "When total PSA is in the range of 4.0-10.0 ng/mL, a free PSA/total PSA ratio of less than or equal to 0.10 indicates a 49% to 65% risk of prostate cancer depending on age. A free PSA/total PSA ratio of greater than 0.25 indicates a 9% to 16% risk of prostate cancer depending on age." It does not comment on the significance of a ratio of 0.13, which I have looked up. The cancer risk is in the area of 20%-25%. However, no source gave estimates for men under the age of 50.
On examination, his urologist can feel no nodules. He has recommended that the patient undergo an MRI of the prostate.
Stating that an MRI is not indicated in a man of his age with his history, the patients insurance company will not pay for the test and suggested a trans-rectal ultrasound. The urologist advised the patient not to have an ultrasound due to his age and the potential for complications. A hospital quoted him an out-of-pocket price of $2500 for the MRI.
The urologist has told him that random biopsies may not be accurate and there is a risk of complications.
When he had his first PSA done three years ago, I had expressed surprise and wondered why it had been offered to him. The patient said his internist told him he should have the test.
He is concerned about these recent results and has asked me for advice which I am not qualified to give.
What would you advise?
Follow-up August 6, 2014
Numerous urologists responded on Twitter with more than 60 tweets about this post. Suggestions for the next step were as follows: trans-rectal ultrasound (TRUS) and biopsy as mentioned by Dr. Cooperberg below; going ahead with the MRI; repeating the PSA in 3 months; go for a second opinion by a recognized expert in prostate cancer.
One urologist emailed me to point out that even if the patient has cancer, it is probably not an aggressive type because his PSA has not risen in 3 years.
Another urologist gave me the name of an expert in the patients geographic area.
The patient has already scheduled an appointment for a second opinion.
