PatrickG
Very interesting read and blog with informative dialogue in about every category.
Let me know your thoughts?
alan226 Member
A VERY interesting read. It should, however, be taken as just one voice out of many. For example, I have Gleason 3+3 which according to the article should not be treated initially and should be "active surveillance". In my case, 3 different doctors told me that based on the size of the lesion (tumor), they would not recommend active surveillance and recommend treatment. In my case I'm choosing radiation.
"Surgery is never required for this disease and is considered gross overtreatment for low risk Gleasons by progressive urologists."
Nothing in life is this absolute......
cuzed Member
This is an interesting read, but should be taken with care. It does have some merit and good points. However everyone's situation is different. The best education I had was getting 2nd opinions (both surgery and radiation options) at a National Cancer Center.
BillSmith Member
Thank you! Really informative!
Dennis E. Golden Moderator & Contributor
Agree on a not treating a Gleason 6 - At the same time it is a good idea to keep an eye on it on with regular check ups - One mistake men make to ignore the need for follow up biopsies. If you are concerned ask your urologist about the availability of HM-MRI scans which can be used to diagnose prostate cancer progression non-invasively.
Richard Faust Community Admin
Hi
Dennis E. Golden Moderator & Contributor