I would suggest:
(1) In addition to asking for the Gleason score, also ask whether any tertiary pattern was observed. As you probbably know, the Gleason score consists of the two most prominent Gleason patterns that were observed. (Hence the X+Y format). But there is sometimes a third (though less prominent) pattern observed, and that can also be relevant. For example, a 3+3 with no tertiary pattern would be better than, say, a 3+3 with a tertiary Gleason 5. So it is worth asking.
(2) I would also request --- regardless of the Gleason score -- that your doctor arrange for a second opinion on the slides to be done by a pathologist with special expertise in prostate cancer pathology, such as Bostwick Labs or Dr. Epstein at Johns Hopkins. If your doctor recommends someone else, make sure that lab/person really is an expert. It is not uncommon for Gleason scores to be changed upon re-reading by such an expert, and because treatment decisions are often made, at least in part, based on Gleason scores, it is important to try to get it right.
Good luck. I hope all off this turns out to be totally irrelevant to you.