Just because a doc recommends that you should stay with active surveillance with Gleason 6 doesn’t mean he’s wrong.

Go ahead and get a 2nd opinion to give yourself some comfort factor for whatever you decide…but anyone who has selected treatment and is telling folks with Gleason 6 to pursue treatment is speaking without understanding the absolutely overwhelming evidence that Gleason 6 does not metastasize.

There will be a small fraction of men who for whatever reason were misdiagnosed…but don’t listen to folks who are pushing you to do what they did.

You will find success stories for EVERY treatment option out there, including active surveillance. It doesn’t mean that it’s the way you should go.

I chose active surveillance and all the data indicates that it was the absolute best option for me.

I am convinced it’s the right choice for me…but that doesn’t mean it’s the right choice for you, as every case is different.

The number one issue is what does the preponderance of particular clinical and genomic data indicate for your particular PCa AND what are you most comfortable with in terms of dealing with the potential side effect risks of any treatment (even if selecting a CoE) versus the potential risks of deciding to wait until you obtain clinical and genomic data that clearly indicates treatment is now required, based on ALL the facts and your own presuppositions.