Hi to All: new here, hope not to be here long,lolol. I look forward to reading and giving any humble input I may have.
My immediate question is very specific, any ideas welcome.
Facts: 60y/o, very healthy, psa went from 4.0 to 6.0 in last 7 years.
3 biopsies (10 point) over last 3 years. 2 neg., last one positive in one of 10 samples, 3+3 gleason 6, volume of tumor 2% of sample. DRE neg, no symptoms.
Opinions: Doctor 1: surgery or radiation seeds; Doctor 2: open or laproscopic radical prostatectomy; Doctor 3: Active Surveilance, ie: MRI to quantify tumor, PSA @6mo., biopsy@1 year. These opinions come from experts at Stanford and UCSFand SKI.

Question: my specific needs are to either have laproscopic surgery or to do the "Active Surveillance". I may be intellectualizing this too much. I am now looking into the specific grade 3 cell activity. I am told grade 3 and grade 4 are like night and day. The tumor volume is very small. Doctors who do surgery want to do surgery. Doctors who do radiation want to do radiation. The doctor who recommended "Active Surveillance" really threw me a curve. Am I playing the odds too much and will likely face a more definitive treatment later when I am less healthy? I see why EACH Person has his OWN decision to make. Any input appreciated thank you.

Ihsdds:

The decision is whatever you are comfortable with, but if you decide to wait I think doing alot of research would be a good idea so that when the time comes for a treatment choice you are ready. Just because the doctors are experts doesn't mean that their choice should be your choice.

It appears that you are in the CA area, so with your numbers proton would be a good treatment to look into. It is noninvasive, cure rate comparable to surgery and side effects (if any) are minimal.

Best of luck to you.

Major

thanks for the info, I will keep you posted.