Connect
← Return to Not Good News after prostate biospy when MRI didn't look too bad
Discussion
Not Good News after prostate biospy when MRI didn't look too bad
Prostate Cancer | Last Active: 1 day ago | Replies (171)Comment receiving replies
@diverjer That’s an interesting response.
> “No, the radiologist did not assign it a SUV score. It was a solitary & suggestive of benign lesion.”
In an earlier post, you mentioned “…The PA-C did call tonight and was sorry, still hasn't sent in Decipher test. Said my PSMA Pet Scan showed Prostate Cancer, he would say Grade Group 3, unfavorable and intermediate.”
If it was a benign lesion, then they would not have assigned an SUVmax score to it (& therefore, no reason to mention SUVmax scores of blood/liver/parotid; though, it still would’ve been good to know how thorough they were being.)
However, if it was a “Grade Group 3, unfavorable and intermediate” as your PA-C indicated, then it would’ve had a SUVmax score assigned to it (probably between the SUVmax scores of blood & liver or liver & parotid).
Still, worth following up on to insure you’re getting consistent information from your medical team members.
Replies to "@diverjer That’s an interesting response. > “No, the radiologist did not assign it a SUV score...."
@brianjarvis
This has been a real pain, the surgical doctor did think they should have assigned a SUV on rib (after he looked at it), and was going to ask for review and ask why no mention of mention SUVmax scores of blood/liver/parotid since they did do a SUV on prostate of 11.1. It doesn't seem like I am asking a whole lot!
KUMC Doctor is out for a week, but ask his nurse to get review done this week. Nurse talked to radiation department and got this responds: " I called and spoke with the nuclear medicine department and it is not standard practice for them to re-review your images to report the SUVs. It was reiterated to me that all pertinent information will be stated in the report".
So they refuse to look at it again! And when they say pertinent info is in report, what does that really mean, I should have access to all of it. I did read that I can submit formally request called an "Over-Read": Explicitly ask for a second interpretation (or "over-read") of your scan, particularly if you suspect a misdiagnosis. You can ask for a subspecialist radiologist to review your scans. However, it seems they ate ignoring that request.
And this is what they call--The University of Kansas Cancer Center
is the only National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated comprehensive cancer center in Kansas and the region, placing it in the top 1% of cancer centers nationwide.
I am really down and figure they are just going to do nothing. Damn medical field!
Connect
@brianjarvis
Yes I posted the PSMA results above and the only place that got a score was below and on phone call he called it Grade Group 3, unfavorable and intermediate:
Abdomen/Pelvis: Multifocal increased radiotracer uptake throughout the prostate gland (including the peripheral and transitional zones). Representative lesion in the left transitional zone at base to midgland has a maximum SUV of 11.1 (PET image 306).
The rib didn't give a score as the PA said in note today that "It was a solitary & suggestive of benign lesion" However that is not what was said in the PSMA radiologist report I posted, it hinted that it could be nothing or it could be as stated below::
Focal increased radiotracer uptake in the left posterior fifth rib, which statistically reflects a benign entity such as fibrous dysplasia. Osseous metastasis is not entirely excluded. Recommend continued attention on routine oncologic follow up imaging and then said:
That doesn’t make me feel all that great as radiologist also just said “Osseous metastasis is not entirely excluded. Recommend continued attention on routine oncologic follow up imaging of the rib”
Especially since I have read that the cancer can skip the nodes and likes to go to ribs and spine. PA also didn’t mention all those other baselines SUV.
As you all can tell, I am confused.