@jeffmarc

Yes, every single study showed those results and they were done on thousands of patients and were randomized.

I am yet to find and TRUE randomized study that shows that waiting for lesion to show is a good idea ! I think that people do not necessarily know difference between different kind of studies (randomized, retrospective, case controlled ) and also where were they done (one location, multiple, single country or multiple ) etc. etc.

There is no single randomized study that was even done to compare patients who waited and did not - to the contrary , every single world renowned organization who DID randomized studies confirmed - do salvage if all possible BEFORE 0.25 after RP for the best possible outcome.

Members here are starting to mix salvage RT post RP with salvage RT after initial salvage failed - those are completely different categories.

Also, age of patient and comorbidities can make a major difference in proposed recommendations for further treatment.

There are randomized studies for salvage RT post RP that went into 0.05 increases and compared results and that is how they not only came to 0.2 but to 0.25 as a cut-off for the best results.

My sincere advice to all is to read, read and read - find studies and "study". Answer is very obvious regardless what business oriented PC influences on the web say ;).