PSMA PET Scan Question: I heard on a... - Advanced Prostate...

Advanced Prostate Cancer

21,030 members26,213 posts

PSMA PET Scan Question

Peeffervescence profile image
36 Replies

I heard on a PCa support group call, from a retired MD, that if your PSA is below 0.1 a PSMA PET scan isn’t useful because it requires a certain level of the PSA to find metastases. Does anyone know if that’s true or is it more of a wives tale or just anecdotal?

Thanks!

Written by
Peeffervescence profile image
Peeffervescence
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
Read more about...
36 Replies
Tall_Allen profile image
Tall_Allen

Pretty useless for PSAs below 0.5, unless other signals of progression (e.g., PSADT or radiographic).

rfgh20 profile image
rfgh20 in reply to Tall_Allen

What if you have Gleason 9 or 10 that may produce little PSA or none at all? Can't it mutate to neuroendocrine histology, for example?

Tall_Allen profile image
Tall_Allen in reply to rfgh20

One treats the disease one has, not the disease one imagines that someday one might have. Neuroendocrine doesn't show up on a PSMA PET scan at all.

Echotango51 profile image
Echotango51

Yes, my MO at MUSC told me PSA had to be above 0.5. My PSA jumped from 0.46 to 1.06 in 45 days and then I had the scan.

I was 0.2 first PSMA/PET (Pylarify) then <0.1 PSA second scan.

Found a high SUV lymph node that CT wouldn't detect.

Not useless in my case.

tsim profile image
tsim in reply to

Tribute to the improved performance of the recently discovered fluorinated radiotracer.

User14952 profile image
User14952

We found 2 lymph node mets with PSA around .3. Test was ordered when PSA was .14. Wasn’t useless for us either.

Keeper70 profile image
Keeper70

My husband had 44 radiation treatments after his first psma scan at .4... found LN recurrent PCa.

now he is <.0.05......that was baseline, now 2nd one is scheduled for 7/6/23...... likely psa too low but MO said it's useful for comparison purposes.....

Peeffervescence profile image
Peeffervescence

Just for context, my last PSA was 0.009.

d3is4me profile image
d3is4me in reply to Peeffervescence

Hi my last PSA was 0.009 and PSMA showed no uptake in bones or lymph glands but showed SUV 4.4 prostate so good to be able to compare with previous PSMA

dans_journey profile image
dans_journey

I had a PSMA PET scan at a PSA of 0.23 ng/mL and it was inconclusive. The only good thing was that it didn't light up like a Christmas tree.

My insurance provider at the time wouldn't pay until my PSA hit 1.0 ng/mL because of the lack of sensitivity at low PSA levels.

Please take a look at Figure 2 in this paper to get an idea of what PSMA PET scans can see at which PSA levels.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/309...

allmo profile image
allmo in reply to dans_journey

Hi Dan,

I applaud you for being the only one in this "popular" thread to provide a reference.

And I see (agree with) you and raise you one.

I quote from an informal (non-research paper) Urology Grand Rounds.

grandroundsinurology.com/pr...

Gallium PSMA detection rate (at 0.2 – 0.5 PSA level is 65 percent). Admittedly, on the high side of reports. And Pyarifly(DcPyl-F18) appears better, admittedly minimally better.

The arbitrary cut point for all the qualifying trials for the PSMA-based ultrasensitive advanced imaging was 0.2. The cut point was chosen because it is one of the common definitions of biochemical recurrence (BCR). I was actually a trial subject in both. Gallium at UCLA and Pylarify at Stanford at 0.2. The trials that lead to their FDA approval. Pylarify was FDA approved June 2021, and like most emergent technologies, not readily available. Who knew it takes time to ramp up scale?

I was one of only 27 trial subjects that got both. And of those 27, I was the only one that had completely discordant results. Otherwise, the Gallium and Pylarify findings were very comparable.

Concerning my PC journey post-prostatectomy, after having been on both UCLA and Stanford's waiting lists, when I reached the trial's BCR cutpoint of 0.2, in Nov. 2019, I ran to both UCLA and Stanford to be in the studies. And though I should not be giving medical advice, if one has "high risk BCR" - in my case PSA DT of 5 months, I would strongly recommend running when one reaches 0.2 because there is an emerging new stage in PC : the oligometastatic stage; admittedly very new, with few studies with short followup; and better yet if one is PSMA+ in the prostate bed only or if one is negative, one can rest more easily that the SOC, salvage RT+/-ADT has a better chance of cure.

On the flip side, if one has "low risk" BCR, especially if one's PSADT is > 15 months, I highly recommend, a completely opposite approach, active surveillance. Believe it or not, prostate cancer is the only cancer (Geez, it is unique) for which there is an emerging concept of active surveillance for a "benign" recurrence.

To be complete, there is a third state which I will call very high risk for which one should not wait, but do adjuvant therapy up front: RT + ADT

a. node positive

b. if node negative - at least two of the following:

clinical stage T3 or T4, Gleason score 8–10, and PSA ≥40 ng/mL

dans_journey profile image
dans_journey in reply to allmo

Thanks for sharing your story and the additional resource, Allmo.

I can relate to your comments about active surveillance for recurrence, because that's what I did for almost six years.

My PSA became detectable again (0.05 ng/mL) 54 months after surgery in September 2015. It had such a long PSA DT that we agreed to just monitor it, and it took almost six years for it to reach BCR of 0.2 ng/mL in July 2021. But we also noticed that the rate of increase was accelerating, and that salvage radiation therapy (SRT) was likely on the horizon for me. I wanted the results of the PSMA PET scan to be able to guide the radiation oncologist as to where to aim his death ray.

After fighting the approval powers that be, the earliest I could get my PSMA PET scan was 30 November 2021. By April 2022, my PSA had jumped to 0.33 ng/mL—a sizeable increase over a short period.

We opted to do SRT with a concurrent round of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). A six-month dose of Eligard was given to me in early May 2022, and there were 35 sessions of SRT in July and August 2022.

The jury is still out as to whether the ADT/SRT combo meal was effective. My 3-month post-SRT PSA reading came in at 0.05 ng/mL, but my radiation oncologist and urologist both agreed that was most likely as a result of the ADT more than the SRT. (My radiation oncologist said it could take 12-24 months after the SRT ended before we know its true impact.) I had PSA tests in March (0.13 ng/mL) and May (0.11 ng/mL), showing that the 6-month dose of Eligard has worn off. They make us cautiously optimistic that the SRT is taking root in taking out the cancer. I have my next PSA in November, and I'm okay with that for now.

j-o-h-n profile image
j-o-h-n in reply to allmo

Greetings allmo, Thank you for your post/contribution, now would you be kind enough to update your bio? All voluntary, Thank you!

Good Luck, Good Health and Good Humor.

j-o-h-n Sunday 07/02/2023 9:36 PM DST

Benkaymel profile image
Benkaymel

I had a PSMA-PET scan when my PSA was 0.21 and it showed multiple sites of PSMA avid disease in the prostate, right pelvis, nodes and bones. I've not had one below 0.1 so can't comment on that.

Thesledge profile image
Thesledge

My radiation oncologist said my needed to be .06before the scan would be useful. I've just reached .07so VA is scheduling the scan with a community provider now. Im 5 years post surgery and had 1round of 39radiation treatments completed 12months ago

dmt1121 profile image
dmt1121 in reply to Thesledge

Please let us know what you find.

LowT profile image
LowT

new enhancing 0.4 x 0.9 cm nodule in prostate bed on prostate MRI. PSA 0.1. PSMA/PET-CT negative. Soon to repeat imaging studies. PSA now 0.24

maley2711 profile image
maley2711

It doesn't require any specific PSA in order to detect any metastases in any patient, but the detection rate is significantly lower for tests done at lower PSA.....ultimately the benefit of testing at lower levels will be if , for those metastases that are found at lower levels, does the subsequent earlier treatment result in a greater life expectancy? The testimony from others here tells us that many Docs do believe it is useful at lower PSAs!

rfgh20 profile image
rfgh20

My PSA was 0.2 and the scan found 4 mets

LJHtx profile image
LJHtx

I had a similar conversation with my radio oncologist last week at MD Anderson. While not directly on point, I was told that cancer cells must be present in the millions for them to become avid on a PSMA scan. My regular oncologist at MD Anderson has also told me that PSMA scans are not useful/indicative with low PSA (my PSA is below 0.5 after ADT). Hope this helps,

EdBar profile image
EdBar

My MO, Dr. Sartor, waited till l reached close to 0.2 before suggesting that I get one. I had been undetectable for 6+ years and on ADT for close 9. It detected a spot on one of my ribs that I had treated with SBRT. It has since fallen back to 0.08, seems to be holding there.

Ed

fourputt profile image
fourputt in reply to EdBar

I'm a patient of Dr. Sartor also. My situation is a little different from yours ( LOL aren't we all) in that I'm not on ADT yet but he suggested a Pylarify scan for me between .3 and .5 . Had one at .4 and it was negative.

I would like to thank you for the time and effort you've put into giving so much information on profile/biography . It is really helpful information and it also tells me you are a warrior. Good luck and keep on keepin on my friend.

EdBar profile image
EdBar in reply to fourputt

Sartor advised me that he had seen guys that have been heavily treated and on long term ADT like me, have tumors show up on a PSMA scan despite having low PSA.

Ed

Dont08759 profile image
Dont08759

I was to start my ADT vacation after 2 years of treatment. My PSA was 0.03 and my T was 3. My oncologist ordered a PSMA scan, Aetna Medicare Advantage denied coverage. Having been on this site for several years I was not surprised and did not appeal…

shaunaliz15 profile image
shaunaliz15

my husband is undetectable and has no other signs of spread other than PSMA scan lighting up .

Seasid profile image
Seasid in reply to shaunaliz15

Could it be false positive? What is the psa? Do you have pain?

TEBozo profile image
TEBozo

That's what I've been told. Just had the new Pylarify PSMA at 0.91 and picked up 2 Mets in 2 lobes.

tarhoosier profile image
tarhoosier

0.2-0.3 psa for six months and CT scan found T5 vertebra met confirmed by PSMA scan. I viewed scan with oncologist and it was bright yellow-orange and unmistakeable. About 1.3 cm. I completed SBRT yesterday, 5 fractions 3500 cgy total. To answer your question (not really) it depends on the result one is seeking.

GARunner profile image
GARunner

I believe that the 0.5 threshold is the general rule. My PSA began rising from undetectable after 5years following salvage radiation. When it got to 0.18 I had a Pylarify PSMA PET/CT and it showed 2 metastases. Lucky I guess. BTW insurance did cover it. Best wishes.

fourputt profile image
fourputt

Just my two cents...and believe that's about what it's worth. If you feel comfortable that your insurance will cover an early scan (below .05) and it will not prohibit coverage on subsequent scans, whether it's positive or negative, it never hurts to establish a base to work off of. Again just my opinion.

Takenca profile image
Takenca

I initially had a pet scan with Auxim when my ultra sensitive PSA was .52. It did not die anything. Recently when my PSA rode to .78 my doctor recommended a PSMA pet scan. It identified 2 tumors in my lymph nodes. They were radiated and I will go for another PSA test in August

Justfor_ profile image
Justfor_

My take:

healthunlocked.com/prostate...

slpdvmmd profile image
slpdvmmd

I think thoughts on this are evolving. I had a PSA below the level of an ultrasensitive test and still had a positive PSMA PET/CT. I know Mayo Clinic has a case series they are collecting, as does Nat Lenzo in Australia, of patients the are PSA "negative" and have PSMA PET/CT positive lesions. An obstacle to case collection is insurance policies/contracts that do not allow payment for PSMA PET/CT unless PSA thresholds are reached. So I do not think there is valid dogma about this question.

LongTimeRunning profile image
LongTimeRunning

My PSA was 0.31, 4 days before my PSMA CT pre-screening scan for PSMaddition trial and dropping (2 weeks later down to 0.16). I was PSMA avid enough for acceptance into the trial. Of note, the locations of the mets were mostly in the same location as noted on the bone/CT scan a few months before. The only difference was a met first noted on the spine was not noted on PSMA scan and one on the rib was noted on PSMA scan, but not noted on the earlier bone/CT scan. Either resolution difference between scans or changes in mets between scan (ADT start half-way between scans). It was about 3.5 months between scans.

Cyclingrealtor profile image
Cyclingrealtor

Late spring 2022 my psa went from .1 to .3 and to .4 over about 12 weeks. There was another 3 weeks after the .4 because I got covid.

At the known .4 the psma scan showed 1 deep right iliac obturator lymph node.

That obviously went to adt, 33 rounds of EBRT and abiraterone in January 2023.

You may also like...

PSMA PET Scan Frequency?

last and only PSMA PET scan was 1.5 years ago showing 6 mets in small bones after PSA consistently...

PSMA PET SCAN AND PSA

vacation. Current PSA is <0.01. Since my PSA at detection in 2019 was only 4. 5 and the PET scan...

PSMA PET scan results

to be gone or inactive. We did the new scan because my PSA was trending up. It had gone from 0.2 in...

Baseline PSMA-Pet scan?

cuff that we should probably get another PSMA-Pet scan to use as a \\"baseline.\\" My question: is...

Accuracy of PSMA PET scan?

accuracy of the PSMA PET scan? How many of you showed \\"no spread\\" with your PSMA scan, but then...