@heavyphil
Here is the explanation from the ancan.org weekly newsletter? It was part of the discussion this week. One reason to just sign up with them to get the newsletter, even if you don’t go to the meetings. Written by Rick Davis.

Is Grade Group 1, Gleason 3+3 Prostate Cancer really malignant? If not, should we call it something else?
Long time AnCan AS participants recognize this old debate. AnCan has long supported one of its prime advocates, Howard Wolinsky and The Active Surveillor, in the campaign to rename. This week the topic resurfaces like an untethered buoy popping up from the from the depths. Prostate Cancer Mortality After Relabeling Low-Grade Prostate Cancer as Precancerous, JAMA Oncology May 21, 2026 authored by Andrew Vickers alongside the usual suspects, AnCan friendly uros... Drs. Cooperberg, Carroll, Pavlovich and Eggener. They have developed a model that predicts by dropping the 'C' word from GG1/G3+3 , it will save lives.
This new study reveals a model - plug in variables and it spits out a result. So this is not reality so much as principle. It suggests that 6 lives will be saved for every life lost to prostate cancer.
The argument is that calling GG1/G3+3 something other than cancer will promote prostate cancer screening with more men PSA tested. That will result in identifying aggressive cancers earlier and reduce prostate cancer specific mortality. The downside is that men with 3+3 not called cancer will won't comply with AS protocols to monitor their condition. That may lead to progression and ultimately death.
AnCan's survey back in 2023 and included below, suggested that only 5% of the 462 surveyed would not comply.
If you want to dig deeper, Howard addresses this far better than I ever could in his comprehensive commentary in The Active Surveillor last Thursday.

There was a link provided, but it didn’t work. If you’re interested, you can go to the Active Surveillor website. I could post this later if people show interest, I will get a fixed link.

Bottom line Gents (& Carers) ... PSA testing saves lives. It is about information not treatment - it's the Providers that cause overtreatment, not us patients. AnCan strongly supports testing.

An interesting slide