Connect
← Return to active surveillance no longer recommended?
Discussion
active surveillance no longer recommended?
Prostate Cancer | Last Active: Jun 16 2:42pm | Replies (10)Comment receiving replies
@kssteve, to my knowledge active surveillance is still a valid option for men with low-grade, slow-growing tumors confined to the prostate gland.
Here's some information from Mayo Clinic
- Active surveillance for prostate cancer https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/active-surveillance-for-prostate-cancer/about/pac-20384946
– Q & A: Active surveillance reasonable approach for low-risk prostate cancer https://newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/tuesday-q-a-active-surveillance-a-reasonable-approach-for-men-with-low-risk-prostate-cancer/
@sanway shared this article in another discussion:
- Monitoring Proves Better Than Active Treatment For Low-Risk Prostate Cancer https://scienceblog.com/523988/monitoring-proves-better-than-active-treatment-for-low-risk-prostate-cancer/
@carlsonte @proftom2 @peekaafighter might be able to share their knowledge or experience on active surveillance with you.
Have you considered a second opinion?
Replies to "@kssteve, to my knowledge active surveillance is still a valid option for men with low-grade, slow-growing..."
I notice that the first article you reference speaks about AS with low-grade G6 and below. But Mayo should be following the NCCN guidelines for prostate cancer, in which G7 favorable is also a consideration for AS. I think possibly they are, as I'm on AS. But the context of this messaging should be changed to reflect the current educational PC knowledge and the changing ideology of PC treatment and non-treatment.
Connect
Run, don't walk, to a new Dr.