Rising PSA at 5 months post-RALP

Posted by animate @animate, 6 days ago

Hello,

With all the fantastic expertise and valuable experiences from the members of this forum, which have provided great help for me in this rugged journey during the past months, I am hoping to receive some feedback regarding my current situation. At 5 months post-RALP, my PSA is at 0.19, practically at the 0.20 cutoff to be considered biochemical recurrence.

At this time, the Oncologist has indicated that we wait another 3 weeks to have another PSA test, and then another PSA test 2 weeks after that, with the intention of confirming an upward trend or a possible stabilization of the value in that range. He has also indicated that I get a PSMA PET/CT at this time, to rule out any signs of possible spread to other areas. He would like to have these test results before we can confirm that SRT is required, which he has pointed as the most likely path for me, along with ADT.

For reference, below is a summary of my clinical profile.

*** My concerns are:
- With a PSA of 0.19, if we wait another 5 weeks for the tests are we risking a further quick rise in PSA that could put me at a less favorable situation to begin SRT/ADT? Should the treatment not be started right away, as I am now within the optimal early salvage window?

- Would ADT really be required? My understanding is that my factors in favor of considering adding ADT are: Gleason 4+3, Positive margin (3 mm, pattern 4), PSA post-RALP: 0.02 → 0.18 → 0.19 (early recurrence) // However, factors against considering the need to add ADT: pT2 (organ-confined), PSA ~0.19, pN0 (nodes negative at surgery), Low tumor volume (~5%).
Would the improvement in cure probability that ADT would add for me be worth the negative side effects?

- Is a PSMA PET/CT scan really required, given that all my image and pathology reports have shown no signs of extracapsular extension? Also, with a PSA of 0.19, will the CT scan show anything (microscopic / below detection)?

Thank you in advance for reviewing my case and concerns, and for providing any possible comments or suggestions.

//// Clinical Profile ////

**Age:** 56 years
**Diagnosis:** Acinar adenocarcinoma of the prostate
---
## **PSA Evolution**
* Aug 2019: 0.599
* Sep 2021: 0.732
* Jan 2023: 0.98
* May 2024: 2.53
* Jun 2025: 3.90

---
## **MRI (July 2025)**
* Single lesion, PI-RADS 4
* Location: left peripheral zone (posterolateral, lower third)
* Size: 8 mm

---
## **Prostate Biopsy (August 2025)**
* 5 out of 15 cores positive
* 2 cores: Gleason 6 (3+3) → low volume
* 2 cores: Gleason 7 (3+4) → significant volume (up to 61%)
* 1 core: Gleason 8 (4+4) → present (transitional zone)

---
## **PSMA PET/CT (September 2025)**
* Focal uptake in prostate (left peripheral zone)
* **miTNM:** T2u N0 M0
**No evidence of:
* Extracapsular extension
* Nodal involvement
* Distant metastases

---
## **Robotic Radical Prostatectomy (November 2025)**
# **Final Pathology**
* **Type: Acinar adenocarcinoma
* **Gleason score: 4+3=7 (Grade Group 3)
* **Pattern 4 predominance in tumor: 90%

**Tumor characteristics:**
* Prostate involvement: 5%
* Multifocal
* No extracapsular extension (pT2)
* Seminal vesicles: negative
* Lymph nodes: 0/1 negative (pN0)
* Perineural invasion: present
* No lymphovascular invasion

**Key finding:**
* **Positive surgical margin**
* Location: left posterior apex
* Length: 3 mm
* Gleason pattern 4 at margin

---
## **Postoperative PSA**
* Dec 2025 (5 weeks): 0.02
* Mar 2026 (4 months): 0.18
* Apr 2026 (4.5 months): 0.19

---
## **Overall Risk Assessment (Post-Prostatectomy)**

### **Adverse Factors**
* Positive surgical margin (pattern 4)
* Gleason 4+3 (high proportion of pattern 4)
* Early PSA rise (< 6 months)

### **Favorable Factors**
* pT2 (no extracapsular extension)
* pN0
* Negative PSMA PET
* Low tumor volume (5%)

Interested in more discussions like this? Go to the Prostate Cancer Support Group.

Profile picture for animate @animate

@begreat99
Thanks for sharing your experience. I have been told that my SRT will involve 37 treatment sessions. I wonder why you only had 8. Was this because they were only targeting the lesion that was found and not the whole prostate bed?

Jump to this post

@animate Typically 3-10 treatments are SBRT (5-10 Gys per fraction) while 20-45 treatments are IMRT (1.8-3.5 Gys per fraction with higher Gys for lower number of fractions). At 37 fractions the dose is about 2 (ask your RO). You can ask RO if it would be better to use 20-28 hypo-fractions at a higher dose but 37 for IMRT salvage radiation is not unusual.

REPLY
Profile picture for jim18 @jim18

@animate Typically 3-10 treatments are SBRT (5-10 Gys per fraction) while 20-45 treatments are IMRT (1.8-3.5 Gys per fraction with higher Gys for lower number of fractions). At 37 fractions the dose is about 2 (ask your RO). You can ask RO if it would be better to use 20-28 hypo-fractions at a higher dose but 37 for IMRT salvage radiation is not unusual.

Jump to this post

@jim18
Tahnks Jim for explaining both Lupron and Orgovyx and also possible RT protocols. Do you know if more sessions with less radiation is better for preventing side effects ?

REPLY
Profile picture for surftohealth88 @surftohealth88

@jim18
Tahnks Jim for explaining both Lupron and Orgovyx and also possible RT protocols. Do you know if more sessions with less radiation is better for preventing side effects ?

Jump to this post

@surftohealth88
More sessions definitely result in fewer side effects because you get less radiation with each session.

I had almost 8 weeks of radiation and no side effects at all. Many people that get IMRT in 20 sessions have side effects, Usually cystitis And fatigue.

REPLY
Profile picture for surftohealth88 @surftohealth88

@jim18
Tahnks Jim for explaining both Lupron and Orgovyx and also possible RT protocols. Do you know if more sessions with less radiation is better for preventing side effects ?

Jump to this post

@surftohealth88 For IMRT studies have shown for the same biological dose (higher fractions have slightly higher biological effect per Gy) the treatment effectiveness and long-term side effects are about the same. There are higher short-term side effects with higher doses, but no difference is found after 6 months. Trade-off is lower cost and fewer treatments for higher short-term pain. Insurance companies tend to favor fewer treatments since they get the gain while the patient gets the pain.

SBRT targets an ablative dose on the tumor and higher doses are more effective. That is why high risk on ultraProstox (SBRT) does not overlap much with high risk for std Prostox (IMRT). For SBRT to work well the RO needs a well-defined lesion to target. That is not always the case with salvage prostate treatment.

REPLY
Profile picture for jim18 @jim18

@surftohealth88 For IMRT studies have shown for the same biological dose (higher fractions have slightly higher biological effect per Gy) the treatment effectiveness and long-term side effects are about the same. There are higher short-term side effects with higher doses, but no difference is found after 6 months. Trade-off is lower cost and fewer treatments for higher short-term pain. Insurance companies tend to favor fewer treatments since they get the gain while the patient gets the pain.

SBRT targets an ablative dose on the tumor and higher doses are more effective. That is why high risk on ultraProstox (SBRT) does not overlap much with high risk for std Prostox (IMRT). For SBRT to work well the RO needs a well-defined lesion to target. That is not always the case with salvage prostate treatment.

Jump to this post

@jim18

Thanks so much for the in depth explanation about protocols and types of radiation. 🌺

REPLY
Please sign in or register to post a reply.