I'm interested in conversations about and I want to talk about
Know exactly what you want?
Show search

Notification

Error

<123

PSA SIGNIFICANT INCREASE POST ERT

User
Posted 11 Aug 2025 at 10:40

Technology will transform diagnosis and treatment.  For example 5 doses of RT.  There's a video on YouTube by Dr Geo where a UK doctor claims imaging will transform how PCa is handled in the next 10yrs.

Edit:

(Dave, Your above reply time travelled to beat original post.  Because I deleted it and then re posted it with a smaller change than I planned)   :)

Edited by member 11 Aug 2025 at 11:02  | Reason: Not specified

User
Posted 11 Aug 2025 at 15:28
One of the reasons why timelines for diagnosis and treatment have increased is greater awareness of PCa due to celebrities' stories and drives to get men PSA tested. With proposed plans to invite men for PSA testing, I think further delays will result. The cost of a PSA blood test is not high but the time processing tests and the waits for treatment and more PSA tests, some for life, will have a cumulative effect.
Barry
User
Posted 21 Aug 2025 at 16:53

Update. Saw a Consultant today. (Good rep and my partner who was with me had met him before with her brother a decade ago. I shared her view that a sound, down-to-earth, helpful, empathetic man.)

He didn't feel that 2.9 clinically demands immediate action. He agreed that PSMA-PET the ideal investigation. Despite his working also through the private sector he discouraged me from paying for it  -  "save your money and go on holiday!". Waiting time c. 2-3 months, but can be much quicker! He did not consider such a delay clinically relevant. (I think some reference by the Macmillan oncology nurse to national shortage of the radiation material.)

I think that had I not raised the question of PSMA-PET he would not have gone to that level yet. More in response to my wish/anxiety to know all ASAP. He saw little point in interim, quicker, less comprehensive imaging tests  -  this may or may not have been linked to resource issues!

He will see me again in 8 weeks, irrespective of whether or not PET has happened and I shall have psa and other bloods test 1 week before that. 

Treatment choices not for consideration until PET results.He was adamant that, for him,  choices not constrained by age.

So, nothing definitive, but as long as "a plan" I feel a lot more relaxed.

That'll do for now.....

dave.

 

 

 

 

User
Posted 21 Aug 2025 at 16:58

Hi Dave,

He sounds a nice sort of bloke, and I'm so pleased that you're now feeling a bit more reassured.

Good luck, mate. 👍

User
Posted 21 Aug 2025 at 17:25

Thank you Adrian. 

We agreed that I'll see Xmas, subject of course to surviving cycling on the roads........

Do for me.

dave.

User
Posted 08 Sep 2025 at 11:15

The waiting is starting to get to me. Now 10 weeks since the adverse PSA result and I am no nearer ANY further investigation never mind treatment (should that be worthwhile). 

The mantra is "speed is of the essence", but I see no signs of that approach. Last week the MacMillan team had me do a Holistic Needs Assessment  -  pretty meaningless. Only "action" was that the compiler would have Oncology Nurse phone me re delays/timing. Even this has not happened.

Increasingly coming to think that might just as well disengage from the "system" and simply live until I don't. Putting off holidays etc in case I get a "call" is annoying and depressing.  Guess I will then need to re-engage with the NHS to obtain a "terminal" letter while still able to get to Dignitas alone.

Such delays will be multiplied many times over by campaign to get as many men as possible "tested". A good thing obviously, but only if  resources match the "new" demand and they will not.

Onward and downward......

Dave

 

User
Posted 08 Sep 2025 at 16:29

David, I have left you a voice message. Might be worth coming along to this meeting on Thursday evening, ironically the subject is about the broken NHS.

https://nottinghamprostatecancersupportgroup.co.uk/

Thanks Chris 

 

If you use what there words the entrance to the building is.

 

https://w3w.co/store.likely.robe

 

 

Edited by member 08 Sep 2025 at 16:34  | Reason: Not specified

User
Posted 08 Sep 2025 at 19:50

^ Thanks Chris. Looks interesting and worthwhile, but I'm unlikely to be able to make this week.

Sorry I missed your call  -  I was driving.

Best regards, Dave 

User
Posted 10 Sep 2025 at 11:21

Hi Itsback,

                  Having read your post, not surprisingly I am also of the view that you have not received what I would consider to a reasonable standard of clinical practice. Suffice to say my knowledge of your NHS system is wanting, but where you in Australia in the same predicament, you would have been afforded the answers you are seeking, well before now. 

                 The issue of grounds for litigation is frivolous. Finding expert medical opinion to argue your case is a nonsense and frankly not worthy of your time nor consideration.

                 Your consultant's opinion maybe a reflection on where they see you in terms of the impact of your comorbidity on prognosis. You do have every right to ask that question of them. Your original markers were high and so with it, BCR was distinct, but your treating Physician should have gone through that scenario with you at the time of your primary treatment.

                 Thus you should evaluate your need to know. For some they would rather smell the roses and let nature take it's course. For others knowledge is their empowerment to direct treatment structure. If you are of the latter view, then a CT with contrast of the pelvic, abdo and thoracic cavities would be a good starting point essentially looking for bulky mets. PSMA is more definitive for smaller mets.

  

                   

User
Posted 11 Sep 2025 at 11:43

Originally Posted by: Online Community Member

Hi Itsback,

                  Having read your post, not surprisingly I am also of the view that you have not received what I would consider to a reasonable standard of clinical practice. Suffice to say my knowledge of your NHS system is wanting, but where you in Australia in the same predicament, you would have been afforded the answers you are seeking, well before now. 

                 The issue of grounds for litigation is frivolous. Finding expert medical opinion to argue your case is a nonsense and frankly not worthy of your time nor consideration.

                 Your consultant's opinion maybe a reflection on where they see you in terms of the impact of your comorbidity on prognosis. You do have every right to ask that question of them. Your original markers were high and so with it, BCR was distinct, but your treating Physician should have gone through that scenario with you at the time of your primary treatment.

                 Thus you should evaluate your need to know. For some they would rather smell the roses and let nature take it's course. For others knowledge is their empowerment to direct treatment structure. If you are of the latter view, then a CT with contrast of the pelvic, abdo and thoracic cavities would be a good starting point essentially looking for bulky mets. PSMA is more definitive for smaller mets.

  

                   

I texted the Oncology Nurses  on Tuesday, setting out my position as above. One phoned me yesterday, Wednesday. (I often miss calls when out cycling but luckily was having a breather sat by the River!)

I gained a little more insight into the Consultant's thinking (the nurse was at our meeting). 

She agreed that she could ask the Consultant about 1. my starting hormone treatment now and/or 2. my having CT and bone scans ( which is what would have been on offer, rather than PSMA PET, a year or so ago). Had my PSA been in the 20s upwards then Consultant would probably have gone with 2. in order to save time because spread etc large enough to "find" with the lesser technology. At 2.9, need the most accurate and sensitive investigation possible in order to determine most appropriate treatment options. The source COULD still be within the prostate.

I think that makes sense!

The PSMA waiting time is national  -  few NHS centres have the capability and the few private sector facilities face the same problems in obtaining the raw, radioactive, materials. 

The Consultant worked on a wait time of 8-10 weeks in setting our next meeting. Given the increasing pressures on NHS, especially PC as a result of heightened awareness, I personally doubt even 10 weeks, but that is outwith my hospital's control.

The Nurse did not consider that the delay would shorten my life expectancy! (Nor do I  -  more likely to be under the wheels of a road raging SUV when I cycle on roads!)

She also briefly touched on potential treatment options. Some I will not countenance and she agreed that most likely outcome is hormone treatment (which might buy me a couple of years of an acceptable quality of life  -  enough for me).

She was good enough to answer my "what would you do?" (accepting her caveat that she doesn't have a prostate!).  She said "wait for PSMA". Good enough for me, she's been in her specialist role for at least 4 years and such folk tend to be more forthright than Doctors.

I doubt I'll secure a cancellation, still having a life I can't always answer my mobile so might well miss out even if I  get the call!

An aside, but I do find that looking fit, healthy,  definitely not obese and obviously  exercising a lot is a drawback  -  "not much wrong with you for your age!" Even my brain still works!

Got a lot of social and other stuff, including my g.f.'s health, on at moment so put the PC disappointment to the back of my mind. Have a short holiday within a few hours of getting to hospital IF a cancellation!

Onward to inevitable departure!

World affairs may of course get us all first.....

Dave.

PS litigation? No. It's a system thing, not any individuals.

 
Forum Jump  
<123
©2025 Prostate Cancer UK