This has bugged me for sometime so I thought I would ask the question.
A PSA test result expressed to tenths like 0.1 is NOT an Ultra sensitive. Likewise a test expressed in thousands like 0.001 IS an Ultra sensitive test.
How do you define one expressed to hundreds like 0.03? Is this a normal or an Ultra sensitive PSA test?
Thanks
Any PSA test whose lowest value is less than 0.1 ng/ml is ultrasensitive. They are all equally useless and cause unnecessary anxiety. They are a relic of the past when we knew less. Some institutions are getting rid of them.
So all those 2 digit PSA test results that Sonora Quest does every time I get a PSA means I really only need to care about the TENS place. That sure makes it a lot simpler and takes a lot of the stress out. Thanks!
That means the last 1.5 to 2 years worth equated to 0.0 PSA. I assume then that my next concern is nearing 0.5 if it even gets there.
It's the trajectory, not the absolute value that is important. But why not use use ultra sensitive PSA to pick up trajectory change a little earlier and a little more accurately.
If I were younger I might be more inclined to do as you suggest but honestly at this point QOL is paramount. I will be 80 next month.
I see very little benefit to living into my 90s. I have enjoyed an amazing life.
Well stated! If it is cancer at X ng/ml it has to be cancer before X, whether one is without a prostate or has a treated prostate. Why give cancer time and obscurity?
Well stated (by @cesanon), and proven in my case.
I found it very useful having the 0.0x level. When my second recurrence PSA reached 0.06 in 2016 (doubling time 3-4 months), I started more treatments which ultimately gave me freedom from ADT. And with PSMA scanning and SBRT, I may never need ADT again. Today my PSA is <0.01 and I have the most peace of mind since my initial diagnosis 19 years ago - in addition to normal testosterone and great physical fitness.
It is dangerous to treat PSA instead of your systemic cancer.
My world class oncologists (including one of the world's best) and I agree 100% on the risk/reward of my diagnostics and treatments. I'm ecstatic with my history and current mental and physical health.
With all due respect to your tremendous knowledge of prostate cancer, you could have more credibility if you could be more open to personalized medicine and have more respect for other guys' decisions on their own healthcare.
You should consider yourself very fortunate in that you were spared scolding for stating PSADT for PSA below 0.1 in your earlier post.
My body, my health, my choices. 
As long as your eyes are open to the fact that you might be just treating your PSA and not your cancer. Personalizing treatment is fine as long as you understand the risks - from your post it wasn't clear that you do.
I have confidence in all three of my world class oncologists, and we all work well together as a team. Every one of my treatments has been successful, and I'm thrilled to be able to maintain normal testosterone which contributes a lot to my quality of life and life expectancy.
As long as your "three world-class oncologists" explained to you the risk of treating your PSA instead of your systemic cancer, it's your decision to make - your body, your life. My concern is with patients who are not clearly informed of the risks.
I can see both points of view expressed above and realize that Ron like others on this forum are highly educated, affluent and have access to superb medical care. I would suggest that the majority of us really do not have the ways and means to develop or understand an individualized medical plan so we relie on the SOC approach.
There is room for both approaches on this forum but recognize that you are in the minority.
Ejaculation before psa test.
Psa test 
just joined seeking advice 
