First question is to understand the characteristics of his case. Those characteristics can then be grouped together into a “risk classification.” The D’Amico Risk Classification is the most widely one used, and the NCCN (which differs only slightly) is probably the second most widely used. Everything else follows from an understanding of the risk classification: either Low, Intermediate, or High.
When there is a conflict in the Gleason score and PSA risk group, the worse factor wins and determines the risk category assignment. For example, a patient with a low Gleason Score of 6 combined with a PSA of 25 ng/ml is considered high risk. The exception to this would be, say, if there is only one positive core out of all of the ones sampled, in which case the risk category goes down to intermediate risk.
LINKBecause more men are diagnosed as Low Risk than any other, it could be prudent to anticipate the next part of the discussion. For many Low Risk men, well-known urology surgeon/prostate specialist from Memorial Sloan-Kettering (MSK),
Dr James Eastham, often advises patients “let’s see what this cancer is going to do” rather than to rush into anything and possibly over-react to an indolent PC. Would this approach be prudent in this case?
Your friend might appreciate this free online webcast of MSK specialists discussing multiple treatment modes, and hearing Eastham comment on the “let’s see” approach himself
HERELastly, your friend should ask where the biopsy slides were read. Was it from a pathologist who specializes in prostate biopsies? If not, he should request having the slides re-read by someone like
Johns Hopkins or
Bostwick. Both are set-up for easy-to-do second opinions of prostate biopsy slides.
best wishes to your friend…