Tag: PSMA PET

Month 164 – Prostate Cancer Update

On By DanIn Hormone Therapy, Prostate Cancer, Radiation Therapy, Recurrence9 Comments

To my regular readers, you may want to skip this post. This is a high-level update intended for my family and friends who don’t regularly follow this blog (gasp!), and it will be shared with them via my personal social media accounts. If you’re new here, welcome. Feel free to read away.

It’s been a while since I’ve provided any detailed update on what’s going on in the world of my prostate cancer, so here goes.

We last left our hero two years ago as he began 35 sessions of salvage radiation therapy on 7 July 2022 in attempt to kill off his recurrent prostate cancer after his surgery in January 2011 ultimately failed. Unfortunately, those little cancer cells have proved themselves to be quite resilient, and the salvage radiation therapy has failed, too. Bummer.

We know this by tracking my prostate-specific antigens (PSA) on a regular basis. After the surgery, my PSA level should have dropped to undetectable (zero) because there was no prostate left to produce the PSA. But the PSA can live on in the cancer cells even without a prostate, and that’s how we know the cancer is still there.

After the radiation, my PSA should have dropped substantially, and it did, at least initially. But about 15 months after the radiation ended, my PSA was on the rise again. It rose enough to the surpass the PSA level when we started the radiation. In May 2024, it continued its upward climb to 0.52 ng/mL, the highest it’s been since the surgery. (In the grand scheme of things, it’s still a low value that many fellow prostate cancer patients would love to have, but the fact that it’s doubling about every six months is a concern.)

There is a relatively new scan that can detect prostate cancer cells at fairly low PSA levels. It works best when the PSA is close to 1.0 ng/mL, but it has detected prostate cancer about 30% of the time at PSA levels in the 0.2–0.3 ng/mL range. I went for this PSMA PET scan in January when my PSA was 0.37 ng/mL, and the scan failed to detect anything.

On the one hand, that’s great because there were no signs of metastasis and no evidence of prostate cancer. But on the other hand, we need to know where the cancer is located and what it’s up to in order to plan our next treatment options. Because it didn’t reveal its ugly head, we can’t make any meaningful treatment decisions right now.

If there are one or two small lesions someplace, we may be able to radiate them again depending on their size and location. But if there aren’t any distinct lesions and my PSA continues to increase, that’s likely the result of micrometastases and that would require a systemic treatment approach (e.g., hormone therapy, immunotherapy, chemotherapy, or any combination thereof).

After reviewing my May PSA results with the urologist, we agreed to punt for six months and do another PSA test in late October. I know that seems counterintuitive—letting the cancer continue to grow without taking action—but there’s a reason for it. I’m predicting my PSA at that point will be in the 0.75–1.0 ng/mL range in October, and we’ll do another PSMA PET scan to see if we can determine what’s going on and then plan from there.

Up until this year, all of my conversations have been with the urologist and radiation oncologist. In February, I met with a medical oncologist for the first time because they’re the ones who deal with the systemic treatments.

Based on my conversations with the urologist and medical oncologist, the next logical treatment option is hormone therapy. Prostate cancer lives off of testosterone, so if we kill off the testosterone, we slow the growth of the cancer cells. (Hormone therapy is not curative, however.) But the timing of starting hormone therapy is important.

If we started the hormone therapy now, it would rapidly knock my PSA down so far that it would make it next to impossible to do the PSMA PET scan in November and get any meaningful results.

The other problem with starting hormone therapy too early is that the prostate cancer can become hormone resistant much in the same way that bacteria can become resistant to antibiotics. Start the treatment too early, and you’ll lose its effectiveness when you really need it later.

There seemed to be a differing of opinions between the urologist and the medical oncologist as to what would trigger the start of hormone therapy. The urologist would hold off until there’s evidence of metastasis; the medical oncologist suggested we’d start when my PSA hit 2.0 ng/mL. We can figure that out when the time comes, but both agreed that hormone therapy (and other therapies) can keep me around another 10–15 years (or more).

Of course, my quality of life may be diminished as a result of the treatments. Hormone therapy can come with a whole host of unpleasant side effects such as fatigue, muscle loss, weight gain, loss of libido, hot flashes, etc. No need to rush into that Disneyland of experiences.

Physically, I am feeling fine. I’m completely asymptomatic when it comes to the cancer, but the side effects from the surgery and radiation are present and are a nuisance more than anything. Psychologically, though, it’s been a bit of an emotional roller coaster ride as I go from PSA test to PSA test, and failed treatment option to failed treatment option. We’re closing in on 14 years since diagnosis, and it does get tiring.

One of my regular blog readers and my urologist both suggested that, at this point, I look at my prostate cancer more as a chronic illness than as a life-threatening disease. I’m still trying to embrace that perspective and, even if I do, the worry will never go away.

There you have it. The latest and greatest in this adventure of living with prostate cancer. Follow along if you want to see my monthly updates, and we’ll probably know more right around the holidays.

Be well!

Header image: Lake Michigan coastline from the John Hancock Center, Chicago, Illinois

Month 162 – Urologist Visit

On By DanIn Hormone Therapy, Prostate Cancer, Radiation Therapy, Recurrence4 Comments

The short version from yesterday’s appointment with the urologist (who happens to be the Urology Department head):

Kick the proverbial can(cer) six months down the road and retest PSA then.

Generally speaking, I’m okay with that approach. I mean, really, what else is there to do at this point? We don’t have sufficient data points to make any definitive treatment decisions right now. Of course, I may feel differently after sleeping on this for a few nights.

I have to admit that it was a challenging meeting because the doctor just wanted to rapid-fire through all the discussion points and it was difficult to get my questions out. In the end, though, I prevailed.

She was blasé about the increase in my PSA, saying it went up “a little bit.” (A 41% increase in my mind is a tad beyond “a little bit,” but what do I know?) She didn’t see much value in doing another PSMA PET scan right now because a scan with a PSA of 0.52 ng/mL has about a 50-50 chance of detecting anything. That somewhat aligns with what the medical oncologist (MO) said in February—that it would be better to wait until my PSA was at least 0.7 or 0.8 before doing another scan.

My SWAG (scientific wild-assed guess) is that my PSA will be between 0.75 ng/mL and 1.1 ng/mL in November based on the average increases in my PSA over the last four readings and my PSA doubling time. (Bookmark this prediction for future reference! 😀)

We did talk about androgen deprivation therapy. Her biggest concern was that starting too early would just accelerate the eventual likelihood of resistance later on when ADT is needed the most, so she wouldn’t start ADT until there’s confirmed metastasis. (By comparison, the MO suggested holding off until my PSA hit 2.0 ng/mL.) I did ask if starting ADT early delays metastasis and she said it didn’t, which I thought was interesting.

We talked about whether it would be a monotherapy or a combination therapy, and she suspected we would start with just a monotherapy. She acknowledged that there are several studies out there showing that a combination therapy may lead to better outcomes but, in her mind, they weren’t persuasive enough to launch straight into combination therapy. However, she did say that there are certain circumstances where it may make sense, one of which was if the metastases was in the spine.

I asked about possible radiation of localized lesions and she was not all that enthusiastic about the idea. Her biggest concern was about going through radiation twice and whether that was a wise thing given what damage it may do to my body. “I’d have to defer to the radiation oncologist to make that assessment,” she said. Her fear was additional radiation damage / side effects, and I would have that same concern, too. I would have to consider very carefully zapping anywhere in the pelvic area again given the changes I have already experienced in my bowel habits.

Even if the scan showed one or two lesions that could be zapped, she would also start ADT because “it’s pretty much guaranteed that there would be cancer elsewhere that didn’t light up on the scan.” That makes sense.

Lastly, given where I’m at in this advanced prostate cancer no-man’s land, I was curious how she would label or stage my cancer. With no evidence of metastases on the last scan, she would still have me at Stage 2. (See the American Cancer Society staging of prostate cancer HERE.)

Of course, in my mind, I turned to the actual definition of metastasis:

the spread of a disease-producing agency (such as cancer cells) from the initial or primary site of disease to another part of the body

I don’t have a prostate (initial or primary site) but I do have evidence of cancer, so it must be in “another part of the body.” By that definition, it must mean that I’m metastatic, right? (Yeah, I know… Nothing in the prostate cancer world is that clear.)

I asked the question about staging more as an academic exercise because it really doesn’t matter much what the label or stage is. All I know is that I’m living with this bug growing inside me.

One of my blog followers, Phil, recently commented that his oncologist considered prostate cancer to be more of a chronic illness than a terminal illness, and that stuck with me. I mentioned that to the doctor, and she embraced that view wholeheartedly, telling me that patients like me can be kept around for many years—even decades—and the disease can be managed like hypertension or diabetes.

Intellectually, I already knew that. But, after 13+ years, it’s quite the mental leap to jump from, “I have the Big C and it continues to grow unabated,” to, “Cancer, schmancer. It’s like arthritis in my big toe. No big deal.” But it is a leap I’m trying to make.

You would expect that, after 13+ years of testing, waiting for results, reviewing results, and planning next steps, I’d be used to it by now. It’s routine. But I’m finding it to be more and more emotionally draining with each cycle as the uncertainty drags on. Perhaps it’s because I’m coming to terms with failed treatments when I had hopes for better outcomes, or perhaps it’s because I’m back in the wait-and-see mode. Or maybe it’s just the cumulative effect of being on this roller coaster for so long.

On the positive side, I know that I’ve been blessed. Many fellow prostate cancer patients would love to have their PSAs be at my level; my quality of life is pretty good considering all that my body has been through; and—most important—I’m still here 13+ years after diagnosis.

On a somewhat related note, I finally got my baseline testosterone results back: 424 ng/dL. That was taken almost two years to the day after receiving my six-month Eligard shot in advance of salvage radiation therapy, so I’m guessing that any effect the Eligard may have had on my testosterone level has worn off by now.

From what I can tell, that’s a decent / normal number for a 66-year-old guy.

At least we have a starting point for reference now.

Well, that’s it for this post. Time to go out and play for six months. Be well!

What’s next:

  • Week of 28 October – Get PSA test
  • 4 November – Physical with primary care physician
  • 14 November – Appointment with urologist

Header Image: La Jolla Coast, San Diego, California

Imaging Alternatives For PSMA Negative Prostate Cancer Patients

On By DanIn imaging, Prostate CancerLeave a comment

Here’s another informative video from the Prostate Cancer Research Institute for the ten percent of patients for whom PSMA PET scans may not work.

If I go for a third PSMA PET scan later this summer, and it fails to show anything at an even higher PSA level than my first two inconclusive scans (0.22 ng/mL and 0.37 ng/mL), I may find myself in that category.

I’ll provide my normal monthly update next week after my visit to the urologist on 14 May.

Day 4,880 – Full MO Report

On By DanIn Hormone Therapy, Prostate Cancer12 Comments

My computer issues have been sorted, so here’s the full scoop behind my meeting with the medical oncologist (MO) on Tuesday.

The meeting started with a nurse practitioner (NP) which threw me for a bit of a loop and initial disappointment. Because this was my initial contact with the oncology team, we spent a bit of time reviewing my history and how we got here. She did say that she would bring the MO into the discussion once we went through the preliminaries.

The nurse had actually done a pretty thorough job of reviewing my file prior to the meeting, and was familiar with the recent bone scan and PSMA PET scan results. Her take on my situation was that we were somewhat in limbo with no signs of metastases anywhere, and that the path forward wasn’t so clear-cut. (That actually led to a brief discussion on how metastases is defined in the world of prostate cancer. She was of the school that it’s not metastatic until it shows up on scans, while I pressed and suggested that, because the prostate is gone and the cancer is somewhere, it must, by traditional definition, be metastatic.)

Once we were through with the initial screening, the nurse brought in the MO and introduced her to me. I did ask if she specialized in prostate cancer and she does not; she’s more of a general oncologist. She did say, however, that she reviewed my case with a genitourinary oncologist at the University of California San Diego (UCSD) the day before our meeting. That was a good to know (but not the same as having a seasoned prostate MO in the room).

At that point, the three of us started going down my checklist of questions.

We talked about whether there was value in delaying the start of any treatment until my PSA rose to a level where a scan would detect the location. In the preliminary screening, the NP seemed to be inclined to start the ADT before another PSMA PET scan, and she was a little surprised that the MO said we should do another scan in six months. The MO said that the scan may reveal lesions that could be spot radiated as a treatment option.

That led to me asking about whether there would be value in whole pelvic radiation and, again, without knowing the cancer’s location neither was a fan of pursuing that at this point. Even if we did know the location, they would defer that decision to the radiation oncologist (RO).

Because my PSA is so low (in relative terms), both seemed to be more inclined to start with just ADT and not a combination therapy of ADT plus antiandrogens. The MO acknowledged that the use of combination therapy could be more effective in controlling the cancer, but cautioned about the increased side effects from doing a combination therapy approach. She also mentioned that using combination therapy is generally reserved for when the cancer is more advanced. (I’m not sure that my research agrees with that thought.)

I believe in her discussion with the UCSD GU oncologist that they said they would probably hold off initiating hormone therapy until my PSA reached 2.0 ng/mL. I’m going to have to do a little research to see if that makes sense.

We talked about intermittent therapy and whether that would be appropriate, and the consensus was that, at my low PSA, I would be a good candidate for intermittent ADT. However, that would depend on my PSA doubling time and how my PSA responds to the ADT.

I did ask if cancer in the lymph nodes would be symptomatic and generally speaking, they said, it’s not. I asked because I had had a weird pressure sensation in my groin last month that was new. (Yes, I’m at that point where I ask myself if every new ache, pain, or sensation is related to the cancer when it pops up.)

They noted going through my record that there was no baseline testosterone test, so we all agreed that that would be helpful to have. The NP put the order in to have that done when I get my PSA tested on 1 May 2024.

The MO expressed concern about my recent cardiac work-ups after my October emergency room visit (nothing of substance was found). She reminded me that hormone therapy does have a small but real risk of increasing cardiac events.

In the last part of the meeting, I did ask if I’ll be seeing the same MO going forward, and the short answer was “indirectly.”

You’ve heard me talk before that one of the drawbacks of getting my care through the VA is that it’s a teaching hospital and that I rarely see the same physician/resident twice. It’s good that I get so many differing opinions, but it prevents me from building a long-term relationship with the doctor as well. Different residents will filter through the oncology department, but the MO I met with will be overseeing all of their cases behind the scenes, so she would be tangentially involved.

I was asking because I likened myself to being an orchestra conductor, coordinating the efforts between the urologists, radiation oncologist, my primary care physician, and now the medical oncologist. I was inquiring if she or anyone else at VA would take the lead on coordinating all of these discussions and treatment considerations. She did mention that they do have a “tumor board” that reviews much more advanced cases to map out coordinated treatment plans, but because I don’t have any substantial tumors in the scans, my case wouldn’t come up for review.

Interesting, though, was the fact that the NP and MO both viewed this meeting as me getting a second opinion instead of a hand-off of my case from the urology department to the oncology department. From their perspective, the urology department still has the lead on my case until I decide to move forward with hormone therapy.

One thing the NP brought up early in the conversation was that any treatment plan would have to be aligned with my goals. If my goal was to prevent metastasis (or delay it), then starting hormone therapy sooner would make more sense. But if my goal was to avoid hormone therapy side effects for as long as possible—recognizing the inherent risks—then it may make sense to delay therapy. To be honest, I’m not sure where on that spectrum I want to land.

We wrapped up the meeting, coming to a consensus that:

  • We’ll conduct a PSA test and get a testosterone baseline on 1 May 2024.
  • Calculate the PSA doubling time including the latest results.
  • Evaluate the results and decide whether to schedule another PSMA PET scan.

While I didn’t keep specific track of the meeting, it lasted somewhere between 30 and 45 minutes, which is quite unusual.

I came out of the meeting in good spirits because it was one of the most productive, collaborative meetings I’ve had in a long time. The conversation flowed quite easily, and I attribute that to the fact that women healthcare professionals seem to be much better prepared and much better at listening to a patient’s concerns than some of their male counterparts. This isn’t the first time that I’ve noticed that. (Don’t forget, it was the thoroughness of my female primary care physician that discovered the cancer via a DRE in the first place.)

To be honest, I’m not sure why I felt compelled to mention these observations based on my personal experiences. I just suspect that some prostate cancer patients may be reluctant to discuss problems with their male bits with female healthcare professionals. You might be surprised by the difference in quality of care that you receive, so don’t rule them out.

I have been more than satisfied with my care from the VA so far but, as my cancer advances, I am beginning to wonder if it makes sense to step outside the VA so I can get a team that is dedicated to my case and one that I can build a long-term relationship with.

At the top of my list would be UCSD followed by Scripps/MD Anderson. But the VA already has such close ties to UCSD, it’s almost like I’m getting care from them already. In fact, the MO I saw is a clinical professor of medicine at UCSD, most of the residents I see in urology are from UCSD, and my VA-provided RO is from UCSD but seeing him required “community care” pre-approval. (Community care is generally only approved if the VA doesn’t have the capacity or capability, so it could be tricky arguing to obtain it.)

So while I’m on Medicare and it would be relatively easy (but more expensive) for me to step away from the VA, I would explore options for getting approval to move into community care at the USCD GU medical oncologist through the VA first.

I’m not keen on changing horses in mid-stream, but it may make sense in the long run. I’ll have to think that through.

And now you know why I didn’t want to try and type this out on my phone on Tuesday. 😂 Thanks for reading this far!

Header image: A rare spring snow in Cuyamaca Rancho State Park, San Diego County, California, 14 March 2024

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 4,820 – PSA Results

On By DanIn Prostate Cancer, Radiation Therapy, Recurrence2 Comments

Okay. I got antsy and went for my PSA test on Friday instead of next week. As expected, my PSA increased from 0.33 ng/mL on 6 December 2023 to 0.37 ng/mL on 19 January 2024.

The silver lining in that cloud is that the rate of increase slowed a bit and it didn’t increase as much as I expected it would.

Sometimes, I get too nerdy for my own good. There was a 91% increase between the May and October readings, and there was a 57% increase between the October and December readings, so I averaged the two increases (74%) and projected that this increase would land me at just over 0.5 ng/mL. This increase ended up being just 12% over the previous December reading. Fickle PSA.

I ran the numbers through the Memorial Sloan-Kettering PSA Doubling Time calculator again, using the five values from March 2023 (0.13) on. My PSA doubling time dropped from 6.7 months to 6.2 months, and my PSA velocity increased from 0.2 ng/mL/yr to 0.3 ng/mL/yr since calculating it back in December.

I went for the test early because I really wanted to know the PSA value going into the PSMA PET scan that’s scheduled on 31 January 2024. Plus, if it dropped, I would have had time to ask the urologist if it was worth going ahead with the scan at a lower PSA level. (Remember, I went for a PSMA PET scan when my PSA was 0.22 ng/mL, and it didn’t show anything at that PSA level. Why subject myself to another dose of Gallium-68 if the outcome may not produce any useful information?)

My follow-up with the urologist to review the PSMA PET scan and PSA results is on 13 February, and we’ll map out what’s next from there.

So that’s the latest and greatest. More to come.

Header image: The famous Torrey Pines Golf Course, San Diego, California, home to the Farmers Insurance Open golf tournament

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

Month 158 – Bone Scan

On By DanIn Prostate Cancer5 Comments

We last left our hero and his urologist lamenting about the VA protocol requiring a bone scan prior to authorizing a PSMA PET scan to try to determine the location of his growing cancer…

Well, things fell into place a little quicker than I expected. I had my bone scan on Monday, 8 January 2024. As expected, the results were:

No abnormal uptake of tracer is seen to suggest osseous metastatic disease.

That’s a good thing. At least it didn’t light up like a Broadway marquee showing metastases everywhere.

I have a follow-up with the urologist on 13 February, and I’ll have another PSA test done in advance of that meeting. The only thing that’s unclear to me is the scheduling of the PSMA PET scan, so I just emailed the urologist to clarify.

In his notes from our December meeting, his plan was to do the “Bone scan and PSMA PET; Follow-up in 6 weeks; and PSA test in advance of the follow-up.”

I asked if he wanted me to complete the PSMA PET before the February meeting, or if he wanted to review the next PSA result and bone scan results in February before scheduling the PSMA PET scan. Hopefully, I’ll have an answer soon.

I have yet to share the bone scan results with the radiation oncologist. I’ll just wait until we have the PSMA PET scan nailed down before contacting him.

Mentally, I’m doing okay with all of this. I’ve reconciled that this is the path that I’m on, and we’ll just take one step and one test result at a time and go from there. That’s not to say that there aren’t days when I get anxious about the unknown ahead. I do. But I’m getting much better at not dwelling on the fact that this is happening.

Other than that, since my last post, I’ve learned that making homemade tamales is an hours-long labor of love; I made a quick trip to Yosemite at Christmas; I completed another orbit around the sun; I’m on tap for possible jury duty next week; and I have family coming to visit in early February. 2024 is off to a busy start.

Stay tuned for more to come…

Header Image: Yosemite Valley from Tunnel View, Yosemite National Park, California

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.)