Connect
← Return to PSMA Pet scan interpretation
Discussion
Prostate Cancer | Last Active: Feb 25 11:49am | Replies (22)
Comment receiving replies
The 36 was from two biopsies. The first a guided biopsy taken after the MRI and then the second on a random biopsy 6 months later. Initially my random samples were rated at 4+3 on two samples. I had them sent to the University hospital for a second opinion where they were down graded to 3+3 and 3+4. So at the time of the 4+3 the urologist was surgery. With the changes made by the pathologist at the University hospital, his recommendation hasn't changed.
Replies to "The 36 was from two biopsies. The first a guided biopsy taken after the MRI and..."
Connect
I would be cautious about a change in treatment based on a biopsy 2nd opinion. Remember that a Gleason score is just one specialist’s experienced, educated opinion of what is seen in the tissues. Much of the interpretation of images, scans, and slides is often as much an art as it is a science and dependent on the skill and experience of whoever is doing the reading. So, if a 1st and 2nd opinion are different, there’s no way to know which one is “right.”
When I was diagnosed with 7(3+4), I got a 2nd opinion on the biopsy tissues.
But, I made a commitment:
> if the 2nd opinion came back a lower 6(3+3), I would still get treated to the higher 7(3+4).
> if the 2nd opinion came back the same 7(3+4), I would get treated to the 7(3+4).
> if the 2nd opinion came back a higher 7(4+3), I would get treated to the higher 7(4+3).
As it turned out, the 2nd opinion came back a higher 7(4+3) so, that’s what I got treated to.
You’ll have to establish your own criteria for which biopsy interpretation you’ll use for making your treatment decision and the outcome you want.
Wishing you the best in your decision.