Category: imaging

Day 4,832 – PSMA PET Scan Results

On By DanIn imaging, Prostate Cancer2 Comments

No evidence of recurrent prostate cancer or metastatic disease.

I know I should be excited but, at the same time, I don’t think I’ve been so frustrated by “good” news. Thanks to the steady increase in my PSA, we know something is happening somewhere, and I was really hoping this scan would end the game of cat-and-mouse that we’ve been playing trying to determine where the cancer is and what to do next. It didn’t.

Even though I recognized going into the scan that, at my PSA level (0.37 ng/mL), there was an approximate 40% chance of detecting something, I was hopeful it would come up with something this time. Silly me and my expectations.

Detection Rate on a Patient Basis Stratified by PSA and Region Tr indicates prostate bed only; N1, pelvic nodes only; M1, extrapelvic only. Proportion of patients with 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET positive findings were stratified by PSA range and region of disease in accordance with PROMISE. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30920593/

The other thing I’m beginning to wonder is if I’m in that 10% of patients for whom PSMA PET scans don’t work. (You may recall that being mentioned in this video from the PCRI: Rising PSA After Prostatectomy.) I have to dig into that more to see if it’s just PSMA PET scans that use Gallium-68 as the tracer, or if that applies to any PSMA PET scan regardless of the tracer used. I’m guessing it’s the latter.

Choline and Axumin scans are another option, but they don’t start reliably picking up cancer locations until the PSA is at 1.0 ng/mL or higher. Assuming my current PSA doubling time (6.2 months) remains steady, that means waiting another 11 months before I hit 1.0 ng/mL for those scans to have a chance of seeing anything.

I’ll be putting together my list of questions for the urologist appointment on 13 February (I’m open to suggestions). I suspect we’ll have a good discussion on subsequent PSA testing, the value of knowing where the cancer is located at this point, and when to start hormone therapy.

Again, the silver lining in this is that my scan didn’t light up like the Las Vegas strip. I need to keep that in mind.

Happy Friday!

Day 4,830 – PSMA PET Scan

On By DanIn imaging, Prostate CancerLeave a comment

PSMA PET scan No. 2 is behind me.

This was different from and easier than the first one. That’s because the VA just did a PET scan today, whereas my scan at UCLA included a CT scan on top of the PET scan.

That fact really didn’t occur to me until all was said and done. I’ll have to ask the doctor about the đifferent approaches.

In any case, today they juiced me up with Gallium-68 shortly after arrival. About 45 minutes later, I was on the scanner table ready to go. I barely felt the table move me through the scanner, and it took about 45 minutes to complete the scan.

Of course, the technician wouldn’t give me any sneak peak insights. “The doctor will interpret the scan.” I expect it could take a week or so for me to see any notes in my online records.

Again, even with my PSA closing in on 0.40 ng/mL, there’s only about a 50-50 chance it will give us any useful information at that PSA level. (As a refresher, my PSA going into the UCLA scan was 0.22 ng/mL.)

More to come.

Day 4,815 – Bone and PSMA PET Scan Update

On By DanIn imaging1 Comment

Just a quick update.

You already know that I completed my bone scan, which the VA required (for some inexplicable reason) before ordering a PSMA PET scan. This morning, I was able to schedule the PSMA PET scan with the VA, and it’s set for 31 January 2024. That was much faster than scheduling it with UCLA two years ago.

I’ll go for a PSA test the week before the PSMA PET scan, perhaps on 24 or 25 January. It will be interesting to see how much it’s increased. As a refresher:

9 May 2023 – 0.11 ng/mL

31 October 2023 – 0.21 ng/mL

6 December 2023 – 0.33 ng/ML

Should I get a pool going to see what it will be this time?

I have an appointment with the urologist on 13 February to review the results and map out next steps.

More to come.

Header image: Sunset over the Pacific Ocean at Carlsbad Beach, California

Day 4,782 – Doctor Discussions

On By DanIn imaging, Prostate Cancer7 Comments

I’ve had conversations with my radiation oncologist and my urologist this week.

UCSD Radiation Oncologist Discussion

The conversation with the RO was via email, which was fine by me. I’m thankful he takes the time to get back to me. In a nutshell, he said:

  • We’re on the verge of needing to do a PSMA PET scan.
  • We should get the PSMA PET scan before any ADT.1
  • If PSMA PET shows limited site(s) of recurrence, SBRT radiation may be an option to “ablate the larger cancer deposit and work in concert with ADT.”

His recommendation was to get the PSMA PET scan now or to wait one month until early January 2024 and take another PSA test. If it remains steady, “we are good,” but if PSA rises again, it would be time for a PSMA PET scan.

I’ll let him know it took me two months to get my first PSMA PET scan at UCLA after speaking to the scheduling office, so getting it “now” may not be an option.

One other thing I need to nail down is where I can get the scan done again. When I had it in November 2021, the only two facilities in the U.S. that were approved to do the scan were UCLA and UCSF. Since then, far more facilities are capable of doing it, I believe including UCSD.

VA Urologist Discussion

Preparing for the meeting today, I put together an outline of things I wanted to discuss:

  • PSMA PET Scan
    • If the VA would cover the cost this time.
    • If there’s a difference in the tracers used (Ga-68 versus PYLARIFY® (piflufolastat F 18)
  • ADT and the timing
  • Whether they prefer a sequential or combination approach (e.g., include chemotherapy with ADT).
  • Getting a medical oncologist who specializes in prostate cancer involved in the case.

But once I got there, I was definitely off my A-game for some reason, and the conversation was one of the weirder, more disjointed conversations that I’ve had with a VA urologist.

First, he was a new (to me) urologist and he entered the exam room a bit like a bull in a China shop. He didn’t introduce himself and just started out with, “I looked at your PSA and read your email. What questions do you have for me?” Not even so much as a, “Sorry to see your PSA increase after SRT.” That threw me off right there.

It was a bumpy conversation, but we eventually talked about most everything on my list. I’ll save the bit about the scan for last.

Interestingly, he seemed to downplay spot radiation if lesions are found during a scan and was more focused on starting androgen deprivation therapy as the next course of treatment. But he wouldn’t start it until after a scan was completed. He did say under certain specific circumstances, spot radiation may be helpful.

In the discussion about sequential versus combination treatments, he said that they would do a combination. I asked if it would be ADT and chemotherapy, and he said no. It would be ADT and antiandrogen therapy in combination using Eligard for the ADT and one of the following:

I asked about chemotherapy with ADT, and he said that the antiandrogens have taken the place of Docetaxel (Taxotere), which I thought was an odd statement from my limited knowledge. I believe that Taxotere is still very much a treatment option used later in the progression of the cancer. I need to dig into that more.

Concerning shifting my case to a medical oncologist (MO), he said that would happen on its own, as he wasn’t allowed to prescribe the antiandrogen drugs. The MO would also know how to better manage the side effects of the combined therapies.

Now, for the kicker part of the conversation…

He agreed that a PSMA PET scan was the best way forward but—and even he disagreed with this—the VA protocol is to have a bone scan first. The protocol said that, if a bone scan was negative, then a PSMA PET scan could be authorized.

He assured me that, at my PSA level of 0.33 ng/mL, the bone scan would, in fact, be negative. (Doing a quick Dr. Google search, it appears that bone scans start to pick up lesions when the PSA is over 20 ng/mL. Yep, 0.33 vs. 20.

So getting my soapbox and editorializing a bit here… It makes zero sense to get a bone scan in my present circumstances. None. The VA can be very slow to catch up with the times in certain circumstances, and this happens to be one of those times. It just seems to be a waste of time and resources when we already know that the bone scan isn’t sensitive enough to pick up anything at my PSA level. But I’m not sure I’m up for “fighting city hall” to try and get the PSMA PET scan out of the gate.

On a positive note, the VA apparently can now do the PSMA PET scan according to the doctor.

I have to admit that I’m toying with the idea of using my Medicare coverage and going outside the VA for the PSMA PET scan and skipping the VA bone scan altogether. I need to dig into that and see how that would work and how quickly that could happen.

I just want to make sure that I’m not shooting myself in the foot in the process—the VA has to authorize community care in advance for them to continue to cover the costs. I don’t want them to say, “Hey, you chose to go outside the VA system, so now you can pay for all the tests and drugs.” I know Medicare would pick up a good chunk of the costs, but I may be on the hook for more than I bargained for.

The urologist thought the bone scan could be scheduled pretty quickly and, if that’s the case, that may put me closer to a PSMA PET scan faster than if I try to go outside the VA and create new relationships with new providers (although I think my radiation oncologist at UCSD may be able to assist me in ordering one and getting it scheduled).

We ended the conversation with him saying that we’ll do another PSA test in three months. That surprised me a bit given its rapid rise over five weeks. “We know it’s going to increase,” he said, but he did offer to retest in six to eight weeks. I don’t think we ever landed on a firm answer, so I need to chase that down.

In a way, though, it’s probably more important to get the scan(s) done first, and tracking the PSA is secondary to that. Does it really matter if we retest PSA in eight weeks versus twelve weeks? I doubt it.

I left the meeting without:

  • A date to have the bone scan.
  • A follow-up date with the urologist (dependent on scan results).
  • A date for the next PSA test.

Sounds like a productive meeting to me. 😂

One other thing that happened today, which was quite unusual for me, was that I was far more nervous going into it than I should have been. I don’t know what was up with that. I had difficulty articulating my thoughts, and my hand was shaking ever so slightly as I was taking notes. That freaked me out even more. I guess the emotions associated with this new chapter have been a bit more than I expected.

When the meeting was over, I sat in the waiting area for a good ten minutes to just decompress and to scribble down a few more notes while the conversation was fresh in my mind.

Once I calmed down, I went to the Nuclear Medicine department to try to schedule the bone scan, but the scheduler was away and the guy staffing the desk wasn’t familiar with the process. I’ll be back there tomorrow morning for another test2, so I can try scheduling again when I’m there tomorrow.

I’ll keep you posted.

  1. This aligns with what Dr. Scholz says in this video. Taking ADT before the scan may reduce the size of the cancer to the point where the scan can’t pick it up. https://youtu.be/CBILHS0FJfk?si=zaoHCOkm-mWOmdyz&t=525 ↩︎

Rising PSA After Prostatectomy – PCRI Video

On By DanIn imaging, Prostate Cancer, Radiation Therapy1 Comment

Here is another informative video from the Prostate Cancer Research Institute and Dr. Scholz. It hit too close to home for me, as it describes the dilemma I faced in deciding when to initiate salvage radiation therapy.

Perhaps the key point that Dr. Scholz makes (at 6:08 in the video) is that there’s “a huge advantage of knowing where the cancer is and allowing the radiation therapist to target that spot” as it relates to a newer approach of letting the PSA rise so that modern imaging can determine the location(s).

Later in the video at the 9:40 mark, he goes on to say:

It’s quite tempting in many of the cases that I see to allow the PSA to go a little bit higher knowing that that 0.5 threshold [used by radiation therapists] was set at a time when we didn’t have scans and we didn’t know where the cancer was. There’s such an advantage of knowing where the cancer is and allowing the radiation therapist to target the disease that I tend to liberalize a little bit and allow the PSAs to rise above 0.5 if necessary.

In other words, because of the value in knowing the location of the cancer that can lead to curative outcomes if properly targeted by the radiation therapist, it may be worth allowing the PSA to rise to the point where it can be detected on a scan.

I toyed with the idea of getting a second PSMA PET scan when my PSA hit 0.33 and 0.36, but because it was rising rapidly and because I knew it could take two to four months to get another PSMA PET scan scheduled, I opted to act and go ahead with the salvage radiation therapy. I do have to question if it may have been wise to do the second scan so the RO knew exactly where to aim because, with my PSA rising again, we may have missed our mark.

Will I dwell on that? Nope. I made the best decision I could with the information available at the time.

The bottom line is that we all have to assess our own risk levels and be comfortable with our decisions.

PSA After #ProstateCancer Surgery | #MarkScholzMD #AlexScholz | PCRI

On By DanIn imaging, Prostate Cancer, Radiation Therapy, Recurrence2 Comments

Here’s a great video highlighting the decision-making dilemma that comes with a rising PSA after surgery.

It reinforces that I wasn’t nuts in agonizing over my decision to move forward with the decision for salvage radiation. There are just so many variables that go into the decision, and even the “experts” are really just taking their best guess at it.

PCF Webinar: PSMA PET Imaging: Doctor and Patient Perspectives

On By DanIn imaging, Prostate CancerLeave a comment

The Prostate Cancer Foundation is having a Zoom webinar on 14 March 2023 04:30 PM Pacific Daylight Time (Los Angeles) to review PSMA PET imaging from both the doctor and patient perspectives. You can register by clicking the image below or by clicking HERE.

(Daylight Saving Time in the U.S. begins on Sunday, 12 March 2023.)

    Day 4,054 – PSMA PET Results

    On By DanIn imaging, Prostate Cancer5 Comments

    They were late. I hate tardiness. 🙂

    Again, going into this, I knew that there was a 50-50 shot that the PSMA PET scan would be able to pick up anything at my PSA level, and it appears that I fell into the “we didn’t see anything” category:

    ONCOLOGIC FINDINGS:

    History of prostate cancer status post prostatectomy with biochemical
    recurrence with:
    – No focal PSMA-uptake in the prostatectomy bed.
    – No PSMA-PET/CT evidence for distant metastasis.

    The fact that they didn’t see anything in my prostate bed and elsewhere is both a good and bad thing. Good, in that whatever cancer may be there was so small that the scan couldn’t pick it up. Bad, in that the scan wasn’t sensitive enough to pick things up at my PSA level (0.22 ng/ml).

    As a reminder, I’m just looking at the printout of my results online, and am not yet in a conversation with my doctor about the results, so I’m a little reluctant to come to too many conclusions about some other comments in the report without the benefit of his expertise. There was a section labeled:

    INDETERMINATE FINDING:

    – Focus of intense PSMA-uptake at the left lung lower lobe (fused 4-263)
    without CT correlate, likely a PSMA injection thrombus, not favored to
    represent metastatic disease.     Attention on follow up.

    I added the emphasis above, but it’s something that raises an eyebrow and probably warrants further monitoring or investigation as suggested. That’s something I’ll speak with the doctor about.

    Speaking of speaking with the doctor, when I had my appointment in early November, we agreed to schedule a follow-up appointment to go over the scan results in January. However, the first available appointment wasn’t until the first week of February. I’m going to work on moving that earlier, even if it’s a call-in appointment instead of an in-person appointment.

    Am I happy with the results? Sort of.

    We know from my rising PSA that there’s cancer somewhere in some quantity. While this may be a “false negative,” it’s nice to know that I didn’t light up like the Rockefeller Center Christmas tree. That would have been bad.

    Will this cause me to run to the radiation oncologist to start salvage radiation right away based on my PSA alone? Nope. I have another PSA test in January, and if that stays in the 0.21-0.22 range, I’ll be content to continue my monitoring. But if it shoots up drastically, that may cause me to reconsider.

    Was it worth $3,300 out-of-pocket? I don’t know. I’m going to get back to you on that one. 🙂

    So that’s my PSMA PET scan story, and I’m sticking to it.

    If I don’t post again before Christmas, I hope you have a great holiday season!

    Be well!

    Dr. Kwon Video – Part 2

    On By DanIn imaging, Prostate Cancer, Recurrence, Treatment6 Comments

    Here’s the second part of Dr. Kwon’s video. Like the first video, it’s very informative (perhaps even more so, at least for me).

    Even though I had seen similar statistics before, one of the kickers for me is that only 33% of recurrent cancer is found in the prostate bed (local); 45% will be metastatic; and 22% will be both local and metastatic. As Dr. Kwon rightly points out, knowing where the cancer is located will guide your treatment decisions, and that’s why I have been so reluctant to blindly step into salvage radiation therapy without having first identified the location of the cancer. Why risk the possible toxic side effects of radiation if you’re not radiating in the correct location?

    In my previous post, I mentioned that Dr. Kwon was a pioneer in dealing with oligometastatic prostate cancer. At the beginning, many in the profession dismissed his work out of hand (I’ll admit I was skeptical, too), but it seems that over the last 10 years, his work has gained the respect of others and is supported by further research.

    In any case, this video is 31 minutes long and I encourage you to watch it.

    PET Imaging Video from Dr. Eugene Kwon

    On By DanIn imaging, Prostate Cancer5 Comments

    Here’s a very informative 23-minute video for both the newly diagnosed and those of us who have been playing with this for a while. It gives a good overview of prostate cancer, imaging in general, and PET imaging specifically.

    Dr. Kwon is from the Mayo Clinic and, as I recall, was an early advocate of using PET imaging in identifying and treating oligometastatic prostate cancer.

    This video was from the Prostate Cancer Research Institute (PCRI) YouTube channel. I’m not sure when Part 2 will be released.