Hi, and welcome.
I'm no doctor; only a knowledgeable lay-person...but it sounds like your doctor is giving excellent advice. He doesn't want you to unnecessarily painc, or to overtreat you. You are probably unaware, but there has been a prostate cancer (PC) overtreatment epidemic in this country, and the men and women here at this site (no doctors, but many with education from school of hard knocks) want you and other newcomers to be aware of this issue. For more on this, and more detailed information for
all PC newcomers like yourself, please read the thread which is at the very top of the list of all threads, titled "Newly diagnosed with PC - read this thread first", or just click
HERE.
There is a wealth of information in that thread which expands widely on the questions you have raised, and it specifically addresses your question about
bone & CT scans, risk (of spread) categorization, etc. (From everything you've provided so far, you are likely either low-risk category, or very low-risk, which is very typical of men who had a biopsy after a slightly elevated PSA test.) Increasing PSA, and the development of low-grade prostate cancer is a very natural part of aging.
Autopsy studies of the prostates of men who died in accidents revealed that the percentage of men with diagnosable PC (not diagnosed, but diagnosable) is about
equal to their ages...80% of 80 year olds, but also 40% of 40 year olds. But most 40 year olds, for example, have never run across the set of circumstances which have led them to a biopsy (often urinary problems trigger the urologist to order biopsy), which is what it takes to diagnose PC.
In other words, there is a very large population of men out there walking around today with PC who don't know it, and most will
never know it because it will cause them
no bother. This gives one a good idea about
how a majority--but not all--cases of PC are indolent versions of the disease. The overtreatment epidemic comes from men with tiny amounts of PC (similar to what was found in you) rushing (often in a panic) into an aggressive, irreversible treatment with bad side effects when they might not have needed treatment at all, or certainly not immediate treatment!
So, your good doctor is urging you
not to panic just because you've heard the "big-C" word, and not rush...but wait and see what's going on with some follow-up testing. That is the best possible advice, in my opinion, that you could get at this time. If you start reading-up on low-risk PC, you will find that the highly respected doctors treating PC from the leading institutions in urology (Memorial Sloan-Kettering, Johns Hopkins, Univ of Calif at San Francisco, etc) are all saying this same thing.
You do obviously have something going on with your prostate, so now is the time to start your education about
men's health. The link I provided above is an outstanding starting point, and it's got links to other key sites. It's very possible (and very common) that you might have a prostate infection driving up your PSA while also having a small amount of low-risk PC which was found in your biopsy. Again, the link I provided you above will be a great starting point for your education.
Do you have any past history of PSA results which you could also provide; that might provide more info on the possibility of infection if the results went up and down, or went up sharply? Also, can you embellish more on the set of circumstances which led to your biopsy?
best wishes...
addded later in an edit: Just yesterday in another thread about
Gleason 3+3 PC, I posted (again!...it's a message that needs to be repeated over and over because of the steady flow of newcomers) this "rule-of-thumb" which I would say it appears your doctor is following: "nobody with 3+3 low-risk PC should ever rush to an aggressive treatment without first having a "re-biopsy". Doctors like yours are to be commended for NOT trying to rush patients with low-risk patients into surgery...we've had far too many in the last decade or more who have done the opposite (and a couple big-name surgeons who gave the industry a bad name), and now there is a backlash among the medical community critical of those who have continued this tactic...thankfully, the tide seems to be turning.