Day 3,906 – UCLA PSMA Update

It’s been a week since I submitted the form on the UCLA website for a referral for the PSMA PET scan, and I hadn’t heard anything back, so I called them this morning.

When I mentioned that I submitted the form about a week ago, the agent said, “Oh. Yeah. We can’t book appointments using the form on our website. We need to take that down.” Uh. Okay. Good to know.

To schedule the PSMA scan:

  • The referring physician needs to call the scheduling number: +1 310-794-1005.
  • UCLA Nuclear Medicine will fax a referral form to the doctor to complete and return.
  • It will take 24-48 hours to process the returned form.
  • They’ll work with the patient to select a date for the scan.

They are currently scheduling appointments in September, so there’s a bit of a delay which isn’t all that surprising.

Now all I have to do is convince my doctor at the VA to go through the process once we get the bone scan results back. I’m not sure how that will go, but you can bet I’ll push pretty hard to make it happen.

If they insist on doing the Axumin scan at the VA first, I guess I’m okay with that. But if that comes back negative, I’ll really press for the PSMA PET scan. I’m just not all that keen on having all this radioactive juice injected in me over the course of a few weeks.

We’ll see how things go.

Be well!

Day 3,900 – Requested Info from UCLA on PSMA PET Imaging

Just a quick update…

This morning, I went onto the UCLA website and filled out the form to request more information about the Ga68 PSMA PET scan and perhaps even schedule an appointment with them. We’ll see how long it takes for them to respond. I’m gue$$ing it may be pretty quickly as they want to get more people using their test and facility. Ju$t a hun¢h.

“Cynic, table for one. Cynic.”


That contrast used in the CT scan yesterday really kicked my butt. The juice was injected into me shortly after 2 p.m., and as I was heading to bed around 9 p.m., I could still feel some of the side effects from it.

I did drink a lot of liquids to help purge it from my system and that translated into multiple runs to the toilet through the night last night. Oh well. It all caught up with me around 2 p.m. this afternoon when my ability to focus just ran head-on into a brick wall. I hung it up at the office and came home.

I just checked for the scan results online, and nothing posted yet. I suspect it will be on the weekend that I’ll be able to see them. Of course, they’re usually written in such a away that a lay person has trouble comprehending what’s on the page. We’ll give it a try, though, when the time comes.

That’s about it for today. Hopefully, the next post has news about the PSMA test or the CT scan results, or both.

Until then, be well!

Day 3,895 – Insurance Update

I just received a quick update from my health insurance company regarding coverage of the Ga68 PSMA PET scan at UCLA—the quick turnaround surprised me. It appears to be good news, but it was a little squishy, so I had to ask for confirmation of a few things.

In their email to me, they listed the contractual amount that they would pay out for each CPT code that I gave them, but that’s all they said. It sort of implies that I’m covered, but it doesn’t say so explicitly. Needless to say, when dealing with insurance companies, I want things to be very explicit without any loopholes.

I just sent them and email asking them to:

  • Confirm that I am covered under my employer-provided healthcare plan.
  • Confirm whether or not UCLA Department of Nuclear Medicine is considered to be in-network or out-of-network (different deductibles).

Hopefully, I get that confirmation early next week and can share the information with my doctor.

More to come…

Be well!

Day 3,893 – PSMA PET at UCLA Info

My health insurance company replied to my email with more questions than answers, which was okay by me because they were trying to learn more about the Ga68 PSMA PET scan at UCLA.

First, they were looking for the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes that would apply to the imaging. I didn’t know what those were, so I had to do a little searching:

Current Procedural Terminology, more commonly known as CPT®, refers to a medical code set created and maintained by the American Medical Association — and used by physicians, allied health professionals, nonphysician practitioners, hospitals, outpatient facilities, and laboratories to represent the services and procedures they perform. No provider of outpatient services gets paid without reporting the proper CPT® codes.

https://www.aapc.com/codes/cpt-codes-range/

I called the Nuclear Medicine Clinic at UCLA (+1 310-794-1005) to get the applicable CPT codes, and they happily shared them with me:

78815
70491
79260
74177
A9597

My insurance company also wanted to know the specific address of the clinic to help determine if they were in or out of network:

200 UCLA Medical Plaza
Los Angeles, CA 90095

Lastly, I did ask the UCLA representative how much the scan costs and, as of 8 July 2021, it’s $3,300.

So I fired all of that information back to my insurance representative and am awaiting her response. I’ll keep you posted.

Be well!

P.S. To anyone trying to get information about the Ga68 PSMA PET at UCLA for their insurance company, you’re welcome!

Watch “Biochemical Recurrence After Local Therapy: Assessment and Management” on YouTube

This is a really interesting (at least to me) video out of the University of California San Francisco (UCSF). Remember that UCSF and UCLA were the two institutions that did considerable work to get the Ga-68 PSMA PET scan approved by the Food and Drug Administration in December 2020.

First, at the 3:04 minute mark in the video, he presents the number of positive scans by PSA level. Interestingly, he references the same study I posted earlier. What differs in this presentation from the other one I posted is that this looks at PSA values <0.2 and from 0.2-0.49, whereas the other study just looked at positive scans for PSA values <0.5. However, something seems off between the two.

In the original study, it showed a positive detection rate of about 38% for PSA values <0.5. In this video, however, the chart appears to show a positive detection rate at the <0.2 PSA level somewhere north of 40%, and a positive detection rate at the 0.2-0.49 PSA level somewhere north of 50%. Perhaps he wasn’t all that skilled at making bar charts in PowerPoint, but something is amiss.

Where I’m encouraged is that it appears that they are, in fact, able to detect cancer at my PSA level or even lower. The only question is, at what rate? I’ll stick with the one in three value for now, which is still better than zero.

I did email one of the doctors on the team at UCSF, and his response was:

There are no guarantees, but there is a chance that a PSMA PET could detect a site of recurrence with a PSA of greater than 0.2. The chance of detection usually increases as the PSA goes up.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement of his own product, but I think that’s more to couch expectations because this is so new and even he is still trying to figure it out. (I admit, I was surprised that he even responded, so I’m thankful for that.)

I’ve got a good list of questions ready for my appointment on Tuesday, and I’m sure I’ll spend some of this holiday weekend adding to it and refining it.

Stay tuned for more.