ExcelMale
Menu
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Videos
Lab Tests
Doctor Finder
Buy Books
About Us
Men’s Health Coaching
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Testosterone Replacement, Low T, HCG, & Beyond
Prostate Related Issues
Lowered PSA, 2.99 to 0.92, in Three Months
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Blackhawk" data-source="post: 145469" data-attributes="member: 16042"><p>My #1 reason to avoid biopsy: Inaccuracy;</p><p></p><p>"As vividly described in a 2002 bulletin from Johns Hopkins University, prostate tumors are like a few small seeds scattered on a large strawberry. Whether a surgeon takes six biopsy samples, or a dozen or more, there's a chance that the cancer will be missed. In a study published in the September 2001 issue of the Journal of Urology, researchers performed biopsies on 820 men who had recently had negative biopsies. In 10 percent of the cases, the second biopsies turned up cancer. According to researchers at the Oregon Health and Science University Cancer Center, however, up to 25 percent of prostate biopsies give a false negative."</p><p></p><p><a href="https://consumer.healthday.com/encyclopedia/men-s-health-28/men-s-problems-health-news-469/prostate-biopsy-647476.html" target="_blank">Prostate Biopsy</a></p><p></p><p>Also, If you have a positive biopsy result, you only have definitive information about the biopsy cores taken, not the other 99.9% of the gland, so Gleason scores are also pretty fickle in diagnostic terms if the biopsy cores miss the worse areas of the gland.</p><p></p><p><a href="https://www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/1097-0215%2820001220%2990%3A6%3C326%3A%3AAID-IJC3%3E3.0.CO%3B2-J" target="_blank">https://www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/1097-0215(20001220)90:6<326::AID-IJC3>3.0.CO;2-J</a></p><p></p><p>Plus, if your PSA remains high despite a negative biopsy, many uros put you on a repeat biopsy train since they may have missed the first time... or second... or third etc.. I am not ready to submit to that when SelectMDX has 98% negative predictive accuracy.</p><p></p><p>And, MRI prior to biopsy allows a more accurate "fusion" biopsy where imaging is overlayed with the ultrasound in situ. Well read MRI is better at identifying small tumors, then biopsy can actually target suspect tissue.</p><p></p><p><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3581822/" target="_blank">MRI–ultrasound fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsy</a></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Blackhawk, post: 145469, member: 16042"] My #1 reason to avoid biopsy: Inaccuracy; "As vividly described in a 2002 bulletin from Johns Hopkins University, prostate tumors are like a few small seeds scattered on a large strawberry. Whether a surgeon takes six biopsy samples, or a dozen or more, there's a chance that the cancer will be missed. In a study published in the September 2001 issue of the Journal of Urology, researchers performed biopsies on 820 men who had recently had negative biopsies. In 10 percent of the cases, the second biopsies turned up cancer. According to researchers at the Oregon Health and Science University Cancer Center, however, up to 25 percent of prostate biopsies give a false negative." [URL='https://consumer.healthday.com/encyclopedia/men-s-health-28/men-s-problems-health-news-469/prostate-biopsy-647476.html']Prostate Biopsy[/URL] Also, If you have a positive biopsy result, you only have definitive information about the biopsy cores taken, not the other 99.9% of the gland, so Gleason scores are also pretty fickle in diagnostic terms if the biopsy cores miss the worse areas of the gland. [URL='https://www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/1097-0215%2820001220%2990%3A6%3C326%3A%3AAID-IJC3%3E3.0.CO%3B2-J']https://www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/1097-0215(20001220)90:6<326::AID-IJC3>3.0.CO;2-J[/URL] Plus, if your PSA remains high despite a negative biopsy, many uros put you on a repeat biopsy train since they may have missed the first time... or second... or third etc.. I am not ready to submit to that when SelectMDX has 98% negative predictive accuracy. And, MRI prior to biopsy allows a more accurate "fusion" biopsy where imaging is overlayed with the ultrasound in situ. Well read MRI is better at identifying small tumors, then biopsy can actually target suspect tissue. [URL="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3581822/"]MRI–ultrasound fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsy[/URL] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Share this page
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Sponsors
Forums
Testosterone Replacement, Low T, HCG, & Beyond
Prostate Related Issues
Lowered PSA, 2.99 to 0.92, in Three Months
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top