It seems weird to see anyone make a statement "there is probably no chance of a cure". The Mayo Clinic has a webpage up entitled "Prostate Cancer Recurrence" that states: "For every 10 people treated for early-stage prostate cancer, studies show that 3 to 5 have a prostate cancer recurrence."
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/prostate-cancer-recurrence/symptoms-causes/syc-20592131
There are different words the docs use to describe future outcomes. Biochemical Recurrence Free Survival until you die of something else describes what most newly diagnosed patients would believe means "cure".

I was astonished when I realized that some docs consider different treatments roughly equivalent if patients survive afterward for comparable lengths of time. One treatment might have a much higher rate of early disease recurrence compared to another, but because there are so many followup therapies that can be applied that keep patients with recurrent cancer alive, the overall length of time of survival after undergoing the two treatments may be described as equivalent.

A patient may not see things this way once they realize what has happened.

If treatment A offers a higher likelihood of disease free recurrence than treatment B, a patient should clearly understand this before making a decision. Other factors will influence the decision such as how do the side effects compare, or how hard is it to access the treatment, etc.

Mack Roach addresses the common perception that if you get surgery and the cancer recurs you can get radiation, whereas if you get radiation first you can't get surgery in this video: