3 years ago I went to my GP about retention and poor flow, my PSA was just over 4, I had an MRI showing benign enlargement, and my 10-point biopsy was negative.
Last Sept my PSA was 11, prompting a retest. This time the "digital" test revealed a lump, the MRI showed it too, and a 12-point biopsy showed 3/12 contained active cancer cells - 2 in the lump but also 1 in the body of the organ. All Gleason 4+5, and apparently T2/N0. An 18F-cytosine PET-CT scan showed no hotspots outside the prostate, so it looks like we've caught it early!
Given the aggressive type I'm already on testosterone-suppressing pills, and now trying to decide between surgery and radiotherapy. The surgeon sounded quite persuasive, right up to him saying that in my case he couldn't spare the nerves, so I'd be left impotent!
I've yet to meet the oncologist and get their take, but reading up on it I already prefer radiotherapy. Locally I can get external beam, and my Macmillan nurse thinks I may be suitable for high dose-rate brachytherapy too, but we'll see.
I'm gradually getting my head around all this. One thing that has confused me and my partner is that the story has been changing. Immediately after the biopsy the docs were saying this was a routine case, low risk, no rush etc. Then I was given the MRI last thing late on Christmas Eve and started to worry! Now I get the impression they think the cancer is serious and could escape at any moment. The surgeon said he doesn't usually bother with hormone therapy before the op, but "in my case" he would prescribe Bicalutamide, which I've just started. I know that's also the precursor to implants and radiotherapy too if I go that route and I'm very happy to put the cancer "on hold" hormonally anyway, but which route should I go? I know I know, wait and see what the oncologist says, but suddenly I'm feeling the urgency too!