Connect← Return to 54M, “favorable” prostate cancer diagnosis — surgery vs. radiation
Discussion
54M, “favorable” prostate cancer diagnosis — surgery vs. radiation
Prostate Cancer | Last Active: Sep 8 10:51pm | Replies (35)Comment receiving replies
@brianjarvis Thanks for the link and time bookmark. I’ve been reading about higher dose presenting better outcomes so it was very interesting to hear his input on the SBRT vs more treatment sessions at lower rad level.
My Pet scan should help provide some clarity on whether I should search out a good Rs-Ralp or look into this type of rad treatment.
It did seem like many of those studies from the video also involved ADT even for the G6 group. Is that fairly standard procedure and something you also had done?
Replies to "@brianjarvis Thanks for the link and time bookmark. I’ve been reading about higher dose presenting better..."
Connect
@ireland1964 Some guys want their G6 treated; I didn’t. (I was on active surveillance with a G6 for 9 years.) Like any other disease, illness, or injury, I don’t get treatment unless it’s medically necessary. Rarely is treatment for a G6 medically necessary.
The issue with moving too quickly to treating a Gleason 6(3+3) is that there’s some debate in the medical community as to whether a G6 should even be called “cancer.” Some in the medical community say that a “3” cell structure can’t metastasize and therefore shouldn’t be considered cancer like a G7+. (That a “true” 6(3+3) is a harmless benign tumor - that it shouldn’t necessarily be treated.) Others in the medical community disagree. So, the debate continues.
This is a presentation by Dr. Scholz referencing a study involving 26,000 cases that concluded that a “true” Gleason 6(3+3), never metastasizes: https://youtu.be/NV8QHzbgamI