Guihan Posted October 17, 2019 Share Posted October 17, 2019 When I was diagnosed with Gleason 6 PCa in 2003, I was advised by my urologist that this was a 'moderately aggressive cancer', and that radical prostatectomy was the best solution. It seems that, in America at least, Gleason 6 is not now considered to be the beast it was once made out to be: www.ascopost.com/issues/july-25-2018/when-can-patients-with-gleason-6-prostate-cancer-safely-undergo-active-surveillance/ I confess that I do not really understand this article. I suffered severe urinary incontinence at the time of my diagnosis, and my PSA was rising sharply. Three years after my RP, my PSA started rising again, and I calculated the doubling time at 67 days. I have been controlling it with ADT since that time. Surely, the only practical options I had were RP or just ADT. I guess I will never know if ADT alone would have been sufficient, but how on earth would 'Active Surveillance' have been of any value in cases like mine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.