Is this the same PSMA scan

[kapakahi]

people here talk about so often? Big news in the Times today, like it's a huge discovery, but is it the same thing, just now blessed by the FDA?

nytimes.com/2020/12/16/heal...

[Tall_Allen]

Yeah, same thing. NYTimes just a little slow:healthunlocked.com/advanced...

[tango65]

Yes, it is but approved only at UCLA and at UCSF. There are other places but one has to be admitted to the clinical trials. I don't know if Medicare and the Medicare insurances supplements will pay for the scan.

[GeorgeGlass in reply to tango65]

Do what do you do when they tell you where the metastasis is located? I had a psma pet scan done and they said where they thought the cancer was but didn't do anything to destroy it. Maybe they thought the area was too sensitive.

[tango65 in reply to GeorgeGlass]

I had a PSMA PET/CT in 2016 and it showed mets in pelvis and abdonen around the vena cava and aorta. They were impossible to irradiate. I went to Germany and had Lu 177 PSMA treatment. One treatment made all mets PSMA negative

[HopingForTheBest1 in reply to tango65]

I have an AETNA Medicare PPO plan. I recently got approved to have a PSMA scan. It was proved to be "medically necessary" as my PSA has been rising.

[pjoshea13]

The NY Times article was in my print edition two days ago. Was amused by:

“It’s the most exciting thing in prostate cancer in my lifetime" ...

Front page news, perhaps? No, the story was buried.

-Patrick

[Fightinghard in reply to pjoshea13]

Why pay for or read that rag? NYT was a great paper years ago. Now constantly tries to spin the news instead of simply reporting the facts.

[pjoshea13 in reply to Fightinghard]

What do you read instead? -Patrick

[Fightinghard in reply to pjoshea13]

Patrick

Usually the Dallas Morning News. But I always take whatever political spin they are using with skepticism and if interested I dig deeper.

I cancelled the NYT in 2016 so I don’t read it anymore. Have they mentioned the Hunter scandal yet?

[kapakahi in reply to Fightinghard]

The Times is just starting point for me and should be for anyone - I read several other sources daily, many of which criticize the Times for its coverage or non-coverage. Its 2016 election coverage was mostly abysmally biased, but it's often good on deep investigations and feature stories, things you can't find elsewhere, its op-eds can be great - there's quite a gulf between its editorial and news sections. In general it's like a wire service for me, like the Post and other mainstream media (and I don't watch TV/cable news at all - I don't like the idea of millionaires telling me what the news is). I read MSM political-economic news with skepticism, then follow up with other sources and kind of combine them all for what I think/hope is a more realistic and complete view.

[pjoshea13]

nytimes.com/2020/08/19/us/p...

[Pick44]

What has all this to do with PSMA tests ?

[immunity1]

yes