← Return to Questions about Active Surveillance as a treatment option

Discussion
Comment receiving replies
@northoftheborder

As I've mentioned in other threads, in many ways a borderline prostate-cancer diagnosis seems much harder to deal with than an advanced one. If you have Gleason 9 and/or metastases, you don't have to waste much time thinking about what to do: the answer is more-or-less "everything possible, as soon as possible."

But with 3+4, you have the whole range of options available, and have to decide how to trade off the risk of the cancer progressing under active surveillance against the other long-term health risks from hormone therapy, surgery, and/or radiation. That uncertainty (there's no way to know you've made the "right" choice) must generate a lot of stress.

Jump to this post


Replies to "As I've mentioned in other threads, in many ways a borderline prostate-cancer diagnosis seems much harder..."

I'm one of those people in the 3+4 limbo area. It is stressful because when I was 3+3, it was easy as AS was the only option. But once I got a new lesion and biopsy report of 3+4, a whole range of options were presented and none of my team members would give a definitive answer but rather spoke of risks and probabilities. For those of us in this realm, I believe a lot of grace is needed, decisions should be based on secondary factors, no one should push one treatment option over another, and treatment decisions should be respected.