Many patients spend a lot of time researching their treatment options. I think that a more productive approach would be spending time getting more information on your individual PC; then the correct option will be more apparent.
Most patients have thier Gleason score, one or two PSA readings and the % of cores from the biopsy. In many cases this is adequate, but the more information you have the better the outcome will be, and you may avoid a treatment option that would not be effective.
The key is making a decision is based on the TOTALITY of all information, not just one or two pieces.
Some additional information and how to use it:
PCA3: can indicate the agressiveness of your PC.
PSA derivatives and kenetics: PSA doubling time, PSA velocity, PSA density. these can indicate how your PC is behaving or growing.
Tumor volume: Can be determined by scans or using a formula that calculates volume by gleason and psa.
Tumor location: By DRE or scans like MRIS or color doppler. You can determine likelyhood of a positive margin and also the agressiveness of the tumor.
PAP; Indicates if the PC has spread beyond the prostate.
Combides MRI: indicates lymphnode involvement.
2nd opinion on original pathology.
3D mapping: multicore biopsy that takes many more samples of your prosate.
2nd and 3rd opinions from noted specialists in Surgery, radiology and oncology. You can learn something from each field that will be different.
Partin tables and Nomograms are useful in predicting the effectivness of various treatments on your individual PC.
Bone and CT scans can indicate matastis, but only if your psa is over 20.
Using all this information you can come to a high probability of what type of PC you have and the seriousness of it. Nothing in the PC world is 100% but you can surely improve the odds with more information.
JohnT