Friend has been seeing a Urologist

I have a good friend, and he is 70 and has had some rise in his PSA.
It is slight but the Dr.'s have been monitoring it.
He has postponed a biopsy, and has had PSA tests, and they say he has a
significant rise in a 4 to 6 month period.........
Sorry, I did not get the actual PSA's although they seemed very low to me.

This Mon. he went to a professional Dr. Urologist, and they did a prostate
massage, and then took a urine sample.....He says the test is not approved
although the Dr. believes in its readings....
He says with this reading he should know whether or not to get a biopsy.
Has anyone heard of this test?

I told him watchful waiting for him....@ 70 what does a guy do.
He is quite well exersized, and I run with him all the time....
john

"jloomis" <jloomis@ocean.net> wrote in message
news:h2ebqj0197t@news5.newsguy.com...

:I have a good friend, and he is 70 and has had some rise in his PSA.
: It is slight but the Dr.'s have been monitoring it.
: He has postponed a biopsy, and has had PSA tests, and they say he has a
: significant rise in a 4 to 6 month period.........
: Sorry, I did not get the actual PSA's although they seemed very low to me.
:
: This Mon. he went to a professional Dr. Urologist, and they did a prostate
: massage, and then took a urine sample.....He says the test is not approved
: although the Dr. believes in its readings....
: He says with this reading he should know whether or not to get a biopsy.
: Has anyone heard of this test?
:
: I told him watchful waiting for him....@ 70 what does a guy do.
: He is quite well exersized, and I run with him all the time....

John, there is something that they can get from microscopic analysis of
urine, but it is not PSA. I don't recall exactly what it is - but I'll be
Steve J. does.

Regardless, there is no test that I know of that reliable points to a biopsy
better than a PSA plust a DRE.

Some uros don't believe in PSAs after 70. Maybe they look for infection and
if none found, they just tell septuagenarian to enjoy life.

Fortunately, in a 70-year-old, he probably has time to muddle through some
mistakes if his uro is making any.

--
PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46
Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c
RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins
PSA <.1 <.1 <.1 .27 .37 .75 PSAD 0.19 years
EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47
PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 PSAD .056 years
Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 and every 4 months there after
PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 .145 PSAD 1.4 years
Casodex added daily 07/06
PSA undetectable since; last checked on 06/04/09
Illegitimati non carborundum

Thanks for the reply.
john
"Steve Kramer" <skramer@cinci.rr.com> wrote in message
news:h2ecsv$ns6$2@news.motzarella.org...
> "jloomis" <jloomis@ocean.net> wrote in message
> news:h2ebqj0197t@news5.newsguy.com...
>
> :I have a good friend, and he is 70 and has had some rise in his PSA.
> : It is slight but the Dr.'s have been monitoring it.
> : He has postponed a biopsy, and has had PSA tests, and they say he has a
> : significant rise in a 4 to 6 month period.........
> : Sorry, I did not get the actual PSA's although they seemed very low to
> me.
> :
> : This Mon. he went to a professional Dr. Urologist, and they did a
> prostate
> : massage, and then took a urine sample.....He says the test is not
> approved
> : although the Dr. believes in its readings....
> : He says with this reading he should know whether or not to get a biopsy.
> : Has anyone heard of this test?
> :
> : I told him watchful waiting for him....@ 70 what does a guy do.
> : He is quite well exersized, and I run with him all the time....
>
> John, there is something that they can get from microscopic analysis of
> urine, but it is not PSA. I don't recall exactly what it is - but I'll be
> Steve J. does.
>
> Regardless, there is no test that I know of that reliable points to a
> biopsy
> better than a PSA plust a DRE.
>
> Some uros don't believe in PSAs after 70. Maybe they look for infection
> and
> if none found, they just tell septuagenarian to enjoy life.
>
> Fortunately, in a 70-year-old, he probably has time to muddle through some
> mistakes if his uro is making any.
>
> --
> PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46
> Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c
> RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins
> PSA <.1 <.1 <.1 .27 .37 .75 PSAD 0.19 years
> EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47
> PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 PSAD .056 years
> Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 and every 4 months there after
> PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 .145 PSAD 1.4 years
> Casodex added daily 07/06
> PSA undetectable since; last checked on 06/04/09
> Illegitimati non carborundum
>
>

On June 30, Steve K replied to John:

> John, there is something that they can get from microscopic analysis of
> urine, but it is not PSA. I don't recall exactly what it is - but I'll be
> Steve J. does.

Welllll, here I was about to fold up for the day, and Steve K lays this
on me ;-)

It's the PCA3 Plus test, previously known as PCA3, previously known as UPM3.

It's offered by Bostwick Labs, which has an enviable reputation. See:
https://www.bostwicklaboratories.com.../pca3plus.aspx

Also search on the term on the encyclopedic website of the Prostate
Cancer Research Institute at
http://prostate-cancer.org/index.html

It sounds quite reliable and I would expect FDA approval fairly soon.

Regards,

Steve J

Thanks for the reply and I forwarded the Bostwick Lab info to my friend for
his review.
john
"Steve Jordan" <mycroftscj1@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Jwz2m.179$R73.37@newsfe12.iad...
> On June 30, Steve K replied to John:
>
>> John, there is something that they can get from microscopic analysis of
>> urine, but it is not PSA. I don't recall exactly what it is - but I'll
>> be Steve J. does.
>
> Welllll, here I was about to fold up for the day, and Steve K lays this on
> me ;-)
>
> It's the PCA3 Plus test, previously known as PCA3, previously known as
> UPM3.
>
> It's offered by Bostwick Labs, which has an enviable reputation. See:
> https://www.bostwicklaboratories.com.../pca3plus.aspx
>
> Also search on the term on the encyclopedic website of the Prostate Cancer
> Research Institute at
> http://prostate-cancer.org/index.html
>
> It sounds quite reliable and I would expect FDA approval fairly soon.
>
> Regards,
>
> Steve J

jloomis wrote:
> Thanks for the reply and I forwarded the Bostwick Lab info to my friend for
> his review.
> john

It looks like your friend is in good hands as his urologist did the PCA3
test, which is much more specific than the PSA test, to avoid an
unnecessary biopsy on a 70 year old. Did you find out whether he had a DRE?

jloomis wrote:

> "Steve Jordan" wrote
>> It's the PCA3 Plus test, previously known as PCA3, previously known as
>> UPM3.

You're/they're kidding, right? A PSA test called "UPM"?
Don't tell me, let me guess; it originated in the Uppa U.S.

I.P.

On Jul 1, 10:09*am, "I.P. Freely" <fuhgheddabou...@noway.nohow> wrote:
> jloomis wrote:
> > "Steve Jordan" wrote
> >> It's the PCA3 Plus test, previously known as PCA3, previously known as
> >> UPM3.
>
> You're/they're kidding, right? A PSA test called "UPM"?
> Don't tell me, let me guess; it originated in the Uppa U.S.
>
> I.P.

I thought the Nararro test used urine.

kevin

kaypeeoh wrote:

> On Jul 1, 10:09 am, "I.P. Freely" <fuhgheddabou...@noway.nohow> wrote:
> > jloomis wrote:
> > > "Steve Jordan" wrote
> > >> It's the PCA3 Plus test, previously known as PCA3, previously known as
> > >> UPM3.
> >
> > You're/they're kidding, right? A PSA test called "UPM"?
> > Don't tell me, let me guess; it originated in the Uppa U.S.
> >
> > I.P.
>
> I thought the Nararro test used urine.
>
> kevin

<
http://www.ucsfcme.com/2009/slides/M...plications.pdf
>

kaypeeoh wrote:
> On Jul 1, 10:09 am, "I.P. Freely" <fuhgheddabou...@noway.nohow> wrote:
>> jloomis wrote:
>>> "Steve Jordan" wrote
>>>> It's the PCA3 Plus test, previously known as PCA3, previously known as
>>>> UPM3.
>> You're/they're kidding, right? A PSA test called "UPM"?
>> Don't tell me, let me guess; it originated in the Uppa U.S.
>>
>> I.P.
>
> I thought the Nararro test used urine.

Say "UPM" and "Uppa U.S." out loud as spoken words. You'll get it.

I.P.

Yes, he has had a DRE and is now going to Stanford Medical University to
evaluate the findings.
Thank You
John
"safire" <safire@tele-net.com> wrote in message
news:h2fq81$55k$1@aioe.org...
> jloomis wrote:
>> Thanks for the reply and I forwarded the Bostwick Lab info to my friend
>> for his review.
>> john
>
> It looks like your friend is in good hands as his urologist did the PCA3
> test, which is much more specific than the PSA test, to avoid an
> unnecessary biopsy on a 70 year old. Did you find out whether he had a
> DRE?