Husband speaking here. I am a 71 year old male with a PSA that went up to 6.8. I wanted a 4K score before considering a biopsy. My result was 1%, which meant that my chance of no dangerous prostate cancer was 99.8 % according to the report. I am happy to avoid the biopsy.
@@luketimber4679 My PSA has gone up and down since then, most recently down. So, my urologist and I are both comfortable without doing a biopsy now, especially because I am now 72. I feel 4K was helpful, but only because my score was 1%, and my unbound PSA was a good percentage too. But I would get a 3T Multi-Parametric MRI if concerns do pop up. I recommend "Invasion of the Prostate Snatchers" a small book by Mark Scholz, M.D. for good information on the subject.
@@seascape35 That's good news! I'm going to ask my primary doctor for a 4K test. My urologists won't approve it. He says I just need a biopsy. I'm 65 with a PSA of 10. Thank you for the book suggestion!
This is obviously a 4Kscore ad. How many times is 4Kscore mentioned without explaining how the heck it's different than the regular PSA tests. The music in the background, obviously to enhance drama, is annoying.
Would have liked to have heard Andrew Vickers' thoughts on the 4Kscore vs Prostate Health Index (PHI) test.. I get the former uses PSA, fPSA, intact, and HK2.. where the latter uses PSA, fPSA, and 2 amino acids ([-2] pro-PSA isoform (p2PSA)), but what about in terms of accuracy or cost or availability? I assume that if a good 4Kscore is 7.5% , then it should agree with a good phi score of
Husband speaking here. I am a 71 year old male with a PSA that went up to 6.8. I wanted a 4K score before considering a biopsy. My result was 1%, which meant that my chance of no dangerous prostate cancer was 99.8 % according to the report. I am happy to avoid the biopsy.
How do things look now? Was 4K score helpful. Did you avoid biopsy or eventually have it? I need a 4K myself/
@@luketimber4679 My PSA has gone up and down since then, most recently down. So, my urologist and I are both comfortable without doing a biopsy now, especially because I am now 72. I feel 4K was helpful, but only because my score was 1%, and my unbound PSA was a good percentage too.
But I would get a 3T Multi-Parametric MRI if concerns do pop up.
I recommend "Invasion of the Prostate Snatchers" a small book by Mark Scholz, M.D. for good information on the subject.
@@seascape35 That's good news! I'm going to ask my primary doctor for a 4K test. My urologists won't approve it. He says I just need a biopsy. I'm 65 with a PSA of 10. Thank you for the book suggestion!
The only sure way is the biopsies yes unpopular accurate pretty much waiting for more blood tests
This is obviously a 4Kscore ad. How many times is 4Kscore mentioned without explaining how the heck it's different than the regular PSA tests. The music in the background, obviously to enhance drama, is annoying.
But do they want to do better , or do they just want to manoeuvre patients towards surgery ?
So far all they want to do is Biopsy NFW
Would have liked to have heard Andrew Vickers' thoughts on the 4Kscore vs Prostate Health Index (PHI) test.. I get the former uses PSA, fPSA, intact, and HK2.. where the latter uses PSA, fPSA, and 2 amino acids ([-2] pro-PSA isoform (p2PSA)), but what about in terms of accuracy or cost or availability? I assume that if a good 4Kscore is 7.5% , then it should agree with a good phi score of