Connect
← Return to Today’s (10/30/25) psa test
Discussion
Comment receiving replies
@melvinw
Your results are unusual. If you do not get an ultra sensitive test, then your results are to one decimal point, yet you show yours as .11. Then you show an ultra sensitive result of .094. Actually, both of those results are ultra sensitive if it really is .11 for the first test. I’ve never had an ultra sensitive test, and my maximum number of decimal points is one for the last eight years. I’ve never seen a lab that gives you two decimal points unless you’re test is ultra sensitive.
The two results you got are just pretty darn the same if you get the tests any amount of time apart.. The difference is really negligible.
So the real question is, how did you get two decimal points if it wasn’t ultra sensitive? What did they call it before that ultra sensitive test?
Replies to "@melvinw Your results are unusual. If you do not get an ultra sensitive test, then your..."
Connect
@jeffmarc Interesting question. The 0.11 reading was from Quest. They do not indicate this as an ultra-sensitive test. It’s just their standard test, using the Siemens chemiluminescent method. The 0.094 reading was from LabCorp, and that was ordered as an ultra-sensitive test. So, perhaps, as you say, the Quest assay is ultra-sensitive but they don’t call it such.
The blood draws for these tests were quite literally back to back, same day (in September) within 15 minutes of each other. Yeah, I thought it was interesting that different assays yielded results that close, or for all practical purposes, the same.
Also makes me wonder what would have happened (or not happened, really) back in June if I had done the LabCorp ultra-sensitive test and it came back < 0.1. Instead, I used Quest then, and my PSA was also 0.11. That number, and a palpable module detected during a DRE, put further testing in motion, which took my right into salvage RT.