Connect
← Return to PSA/MRI not too bad, Biopsy not too good. What?? [updated]
Discussion
PSA/MRI not too bad, Biopsy not too good. What?? [updated]
Prostate Cancer | Last Active: Jan 21 2:39pm | Replies (48)Comment receiving replies
@jeffmarc my fusion biopsy came back with 12 out of 14 samples positive. All 3+4 except for one 3+3. Doctor never mentioned the possibility of doing a PET Scan to check for spread. He said I could do surveillance for 6 months, take out the prostate , or radiation. Doing a consult with surgeon next week. Should I ask for a pet scan?
Replies to "@jeffmarc my fusion biopsy came back with 12 out of 14 samples positive. All 3+4 except..."
@kennyo While the PET scan is not infallible, it is a MUST when deciding on treatment. It could show areas of spread into lymph nodes which would render surgery useless…
Or it could show NO spread anywhere, which might induce you to have surgery. You have many options at this point but you CANNOT move forward without this piece of information.
Ask your doctor about PET and if he is not 100% in favor of it, run like hell because he/she is practicing in the dark.
Phil
Connect
@kennyo
12 out of 14 samples is very high.
I am wondering what’s going on with your doctor that’s a PSMA PET scan is not being ordered. With such extensive cancer in the prostate, it is very possible your cancer has spread outside the prostate.
You don’t mention where your PSA is right now. If you’ve been on ADT and it’s undetectable, then a PET scan doesn’t make sense. If your PSA is above .5, you should have a PET scan right away. A center of excellence with almost definitely have you get one.
If your PSA is undetectable, you should have a CT scan and a bone scan to see if there is spread somewhere else. These are all paid for my insurance. These tests are not as useful as a PSMA pet scan, but they are very good at finding prostate cancer That has spread. You may have a previous CT scan that they can compare it against.
With 11 out of 14 with 3+4 I cannot understand why a doctor would recommend active surveillance. That is just not the correct diagnosis.
You should consider seeing a center of excellence for a second opinion.